chapter-iv results and discussionshodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/27566/13/13_chapter...
Post on 15-Mar-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CHAPTER-IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CHAPTER- IV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.0 Introduction 101
4.1 The socio demographic details of the
respondents
102
4.2
Analysis of Drinking Motives Questionnaire-
Revised (DMQ-R) on its sub scales
105
4.3
The percentage score of respondents on
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test
(AUDIT)
127
4.4
Effect of psychosocial education tested by
Paired‘t’ test
139
4.5
Effect of intervention tested by Paired t test on
Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)
145
4.6
ANa ANOVA results for DMQ-R based on the socio-
demographic variables before and after psychosocial
147
97-192
4.7
ANOVA results for AUDIT based on their socio-
demographic variables before and after
psychosocial education
153
4.8
Chi-Square test results of DMQ-R
157
4,9 Chi -Square test results of AUDIT questions 160
4.10 The results of the relationship with various socio-
demographic variables on DMQ-R before
psychosocial education
162
4.11 Results of the drinking levels of the respondents
on DMQ-R sub scales
164
4.12
Percentage score on drinking levels in conformity
(CON) motives by Year of graduate study before &
after psychosocial education
174
4.13
Results of the respondents drinking levels on
AUDIT before and after psychosocial education
175
4.14 Regression Analysis
181
.4.15. Summary of the hypotheses test 183
4.16 Conclusion
185
CHAPTER - 4
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.0. INTRODUCTION
The application of statistical techniques in analyzing and interpreting the collected data plays
an important role in any research study. The data must be carefully processed, systematically
classified and tabulated and scientifically analyzed to arrive at logical conclusions. The current
chapter deals with the analysis of the data collected and interpretations. Mean and standard deviation
for the tool was calculated. Based on mean and standard deviation scores t-values were computed to
know the significant difference, if any, between them.
This chapter deals with the analysis and interpretation of the data. All the details are presented
below with appropriate tables, charts and the respective discussions
The main objective of this particular investigation is to find out the efficacy of psychosocial
education in drinking related problems among undergraduate students. In Indian colleges it is not
mandatory to give education in alcohol. There may be education about overall health issues and
remedies. The researcher wants to convey a message that a minimal form of alcohol education can
make a big difference among college students because they are the most vulnerable category among
alcohol users. The various reasons were discussed in the previous chapters. Accordingly, 225 male
under graduate students aged 18 to 23 as study subjects filled up background questionnaire, Drinking
motives questionnaire-revised (DMQR) and Alcohol use disorders identificationtest (AUDIT). Its
known fact, alcohol consumption depends on different motives and this in turn leads to addiction. The
researcher found these two tools suitable for alcohol misuse prevention. The individual scores for all
the variables were obtained and later individual sessions on psychosocial education were assigned.
After the sessions, each student was asked to fill up another round of the questionnaires, i.e., the two
tools, the DMQR and the AUDIT. The researcher completed the sessions and the questionnaires with
225 students within a year’s time.
225 male students, the age group of 18 to 23 were subjects for this intervention study. The socio-
demographic details are depicted in table 4.1.
Table 4.1. The socio-demographic details of the respondents
Socio- demographic details Number of respondents Percentage
Gender
Male
225
100%
Age
18
19
20
21
22
23
40
55
53
42
16
19
17.8%
24,4%
23.6%
18.7%
7.1%
8,4%
Year
1st year
2nd year
3rd year
75
75
75
33.3%
33.3%
33.3%
Course
BCOM
75
33.3%
Only male students were considered since they are more in number and are addicted to alcoholism.
Pradeep and colleagues study included only males because majority of patients who came with
alcohol related problems were males, 20 to 50 year old men, at an urban teaching hospital in
Bangalore, (Pradeep et al 2010)1 to compare among men and women about their alcohol use in India,
faces difficulties, because male drinking is far higher than female drinking. So the present study can
be very similar in this area with that of Pradeep and others study.
Majority of the respondents (64%) belong to age group 18-20 and the rest 21 -23. Recent surveys in
India have showed that the percentage of drinking alcohol is much higher in rates in city colleges,
especially the age 18 to 23, and have forced the researcher to take up this particular age for this study.
Researchers have found a strong association with this study. Hingson and colleagues (2005) 2 study
on students, between ages of 18 and 24, on the death rate of students in colleges changed from the
year 1998 to 2001. Their results has showed that the injuries and death from colleges because of
BBM
BCA
75
75
33.3%
33.3%
Livingwith the family or not
Yes
No
72
153
32.0%
68%
Type of family
Nuclear
Joint family
Extended family
167
27
31
74.2%
12.0%
13.8%
alcoholism has increased to 6% during this period which has become a great concern for proper
preventive measures.
The students are equally distributed (33.33% each) in the three years of graduate studies and from the
three disciplines of the study, some of the points are quite similar to the previous study by Kraus and
colleagues, they also done on undergraduate students. (Kraus L et al 2005)3 also another study by
Grant Valerie et al 2007 4 supports the present study we have seen from the above table (table 4.1)
that 72 (32%) of the students stay with the family and the rest away from family. This means more
students (68%) are staying away from parents definitely have an influence from their peers. This may
be an important factor for their alcohol misuse.
A large number of students come from nuclear family - 167 (74.2%) then comes the extended family
with - 31 (13.8%) students and from joint family - 27 (12%) students.
Sharma and his colleagues study strongly support the present study on nuclear family base. The units
of the study were 14 to 19 years old adolescents studying in various schools and colleges in South
Delhi. Three-fourths belonged to a nuclear family and the remaining were part of a joint family, and
boys are more likely than girls to smoke, drink, and use drugs. (Sharma Rahul , Grover L Vijay ,
ChaturvediSanjay, April2010)5
The results are primarily depended on the data analysis from the Drinking motives scale and Alcohol
use scale and socio-demographic details handed over to each student by the researcher. Psychosocial
education was imparted to students after detailed explanation and elucidation of each question. Their
doubts were clarified to perceive and understand the relevance of this education. Both DMQ-R and
AUDIT questionnaires are widely used in college population to assess their drinking habits and to
prepare them for preventive measures to avoid alcohol misuse.
Kuntsche and others investigated cross-national differences (1) in the four-dimensional factor
structure of drinking motives; (2) in the mean levels of enhancement, coping, social, and conformity
motives; and (3) in the association of these motives with adolescent alcohol use, risky single-occasion
drinking, and alcohol-related problems. (Kuntsche, Stewart, Cooper 2008).6 Another study
byCarey and Correia’s (1997)7 Their research work on ‘Drinking motives predict alcohol-related
problems in college students’ supported the present study findings, in their study result supported
the utility of motivational models of alcohol use in understanding alcohol-related problems in college,
same result was observed from this study also. On AUDIT, the researcher found that Kokotailo et
al’s (2004)8study on Validity of the alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test in College Students was
very supportive. The researcher also found these questionnaires most suited for this study to assess the
drinking patterns and provide them remedial measures. The education mainly stressed on the causes
of drinking and its bad effects. The same questionnaires were used to find out changes if any, in their
attitude to drinking.
Reliability test
Reliability test were conducted for both the research tools. DMQ-R tool the data shows Chronbavh’s
alpha is 0.757 which is significantly high and AUDIT scale the value is 0.535 which is also
significantly high
The results are discussed with reference to the objectives and hypothesis formulated in the
present study. The Analysis & Interpretations of the study are discussed as follows:
4.2 Analysis of Drinking Motives Questionnaire-Revised (DMQ-R) on its sub scales
The detailed analysis of the results of the DMQR consists of 20 items on 4 sub scales, rated on a 5-
point Likert scale as follows:
The percentage of students calculated for each question covered and what they reported before and
after the intervention is illustrated in the tables and figures given below.
Table- 4.2.1 The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R-on sub scale coping motives
(COP) – before psychosocial education
COP before
education
Q1 Q4 Q6 Q15 Q17
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 7 3.1% 18 8.0% 15 6.7% 11 4.9% 4 1.8%
Some of the
time (2) 28 12.4%
Half of the
time (3) 39 17.3%
Most of the
time (4) 42 18.7%
Almost always
(5) 109 48.4%
n 225 100.0
Mode 5.00
Figure- 4.2.1 The percentage scores of
motives(COP)–before psychosocial education
The values in the table & column chart above indicate motivation for drinking in the coping domain to
forget their worries (The percentage
worries - on sub scale coping motives
them using various options like- almost, always and most of the time
67.1% (extreme), 17.3% (moderate) and (12.4+3.1= 15.5%) 15.5 %( low) drinkers. The assessment
above shows that they are not aware of the dangers of alcohol use. They often get upset and anxious
for silly reasons and turn to alcohol for relief and become addicts in due course of time. At
psychosocial education can serve them to control and command their instinct.
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
Q.1 Q4
33 14.7% 27 12.0% 37 16.4% 49
29 12.9% 17 7.6% 66 29.3% 60
44 19.6% 84 37.3% 63 28.0% 73
101 44.9% 82 36.4% 48 21.3% 39
225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225
5.00 4.00 3.00 4.00
scores of respondents on DMQ-R-on sub scale coping
psychosocial education
The values in the table & column chart above indicate motivation for drinking in the coping domain to
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQR- question no.1 -
n sub scale coping motives (COP) - before psychosocial education) When we categorize
almost, always and most of the time (49% + 19% = 67.1%), we get
e) and (12.4+3.1= 15.5%) 15.5 %( low) drinkers. The assessment
above shows that they are not aware of the dangers of alcohol use. They often get upset and anxious
for silly reasons and turn to alcohol for relief and become addicts in due course of time. At
psychosocial education can serve them to control and command their instinct.
Q6 Q15 Q17
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
49 21.8%
60 26.7%
73 32.4%
39 17.3%
225 100.0
4.00
n sub scale coping
The values in the table & column chart above indicate motivation for drinking in the coping domain to
to forget one’s
When we categorize
(49% + 19% = 67.1%), we get
e) and (12.4+3.1= 15.5%) 15.5 %( low) drinkers. The assessment
above shows that they are not aware of the dangers of alcohol use. They often get upset and anxious
for silly reasons and turn to alcohol for relief and become addicts in due course of time. At this stage,
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQR-question no.4- Does drinking helps you when you
feel depressed or nervous, on sub scale coping motives (COP) before psychosocial education, the
results reveal that when students are depressed or nervous they opt drinking to cope up stress,
depression and nervousness. 45% of students chose drink always option and 19.6 selected most of
the time. The nature of drinking can be observed from the above table & figures. The startling fact
that alcohol acts as a central nervous system depressant and damages the brain functions. The
findings from a study by Brown and his colleagues reveal that adolescents might be able to stay
awake and move even with higher blood alcohol levels than adults with an equivalent history of
alcohol exposure. At the same time, they are exposed to greater alcohol-induced cognitive
impairments and possibly, more injury to the brain following high alcohol exposure levels. (Brown,
S.A., Tapert, S.F., Granholm, E., and Delis, D.C. 2000) 9
It’s clear from the above table & charts that before psychosocial education, students drank to
cheer up themselves, (DMQ-R question no 6 on COP when they are in a bad mood) 36% chose
almost/always and 37.3% chose most of the time. These two value score on the higher side needs to
be taken care of. While answering this question, 73.7% of the students out of 225 of the total students
are on the higher side of drinking motives. The mode scores of respondents are five before education.
Coping motives refer to drinking that
is motivated by a desire to escape internal negative experiences such as anxiety, depression, or
uncertainty. The present study is supported byNeighbors et al. (2004) 10 study titled ‘Feeling
Controlled and Drinking Motives among College Students: Contingent Self-Esteem as a Mediator’,
which explains about using different ways of interventions to prevent alcohol misuse.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R- question no.15 Does drinking makes you confident
on sub scale coping motives (COP) before psychosocial educationillustrates that a wrong belief or
myth about alcohol guided them to drink it for self confidence. Almost (28+21.3=49.3) 50% of the
students are on the higher side in this question before education. The result of the study is also in line
with the view point of a study by Stewarts and Chambers on Drinking motives and restraint,
according to them coping motives scores have been found to be directly associated with increased
alcohol problems even after levels of consumption are controlled(S.H. Stewart, Chambers Laura
2000) 11
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no.17 to forget about your problems on
sub scale coping motives (COP)before psychosocial educationshows that 32.4% of the students drink
most of the time to forget their problems. If we take the higher side values (32.4+17.3=49.7) 49.7% of
the students had drinking habits
Table 4.2.2 The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale coping
motives (COP) after psychosocial education
COP after
education
Q1 Q4 Q6 Q15 Q17
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 183 81.3% 181 80.4% 168 74.7% 202 89.8% 207 92.0%
Some of the
time (2) 39 17.3%
41 18.2% 51 22.7% 20 8.9% 18 8.0%
Half of the
time (3) 3 1.3%
2 .9% 5 2.2% 3 1.3% 0 0%
Most of the
time (4) 0 0%
1 .4% 1 .4% 0 0% 0 0%
Almost always
(5) 0 0%
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
n 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Figure- 4.2.2 The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
motives (COP) after psychosocial education
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQR
sub scale coping motives (COP) after
acts as a central nervous system depressant and damages the brain functions, changed the
attitude of students towards alcohol use. The t
Students were able to switch on to moderate levels. More than 80% of students, who
underwent the intervention, changed their habit of alcohol consumption as a relief for their
worries. This finding is in consonanc
et al 2007 studies examined the relationship between motives for drinking and use of alcohol
may depend on the protective behavior of the college students. This protective behavior
strategy positively reflected on social and enhancement motives and not mediated the
relationship with alcohol related problems and coping motives on negative side also.
(Martens P. Matthew, Ferrier G. Amanda, Cimini Dolores M (2007)
It has been found out from the above table
significant reduction insub scale coping motives on depressed or nervous students.
The results reveal that when students are depressed or nervous they opt drinking to cope up
stress, depression and nervousness. If the above reasons are accountable for drinking
occasionally, the researcher feels that education will surely help them .It should be noted that
special consultation and rehabilitation should follow education. After the education they
realized that drinking can be dangerous to their health and 80% of the stu
attitude towards drinking. . Later it is evident that students viewed alcohol to be a drug that
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
1 2
scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale coping
after psychosocial education
scores of respondents on DMQR- question no.1 - to forget one’s worries
(COP) after psychosocial education,the startling fact that alcohol
acts as a central nervous system depressant and damages the brain functions, changed the
attitude of students towards alcohol use. The table is suggestive of the above statement.
Students were able to switch on to moderate levels. More than 80% of students, who
underwent the intervention, changed their habit of alcohol consumption as a relief for their
worries. This finding is in consonance with the results obtained from the studies of
studies examined the relationship between motives for drinking and use of alcohol
may depend on the protective behavior of the college students. This protective behavior
strategy positively reflected on social and enhancement motives and not mediated the
relationship with alcohol related problems and coping motives on negative side also.
Martens P. Matthew, Ferrier G. Amanda, Cimini Dolores M (2007)12
It has been found out from the above table-4.2.2 that after psychosocial education there is a
t reduction insub scale coping motives on depressed or nervous students.
The results reveal that when students are depressed or nervous they opt drinking to cope up
stress, depression and nervousness. If the above reasons are accountable for drinking
ionally, the researcher feels that education will surely help them .It should be noted that
special consultation and rehabilitation should follow education. After the education they
realized that drinking can be dangerous to their health and 80% of the students changed their
attitude towards drinking. . Later it is evident that students viewed alcohol to be a drug that
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
on sub scale coping
forget one’s worries - on
the startling fact that alcohol
acts as a central nervous system depressant and damages the brain functions, changed the
able is suggestive of the above statement.
Students were able to switch on to moderate levels. More than 80% of students, who
underwent the intervention, changed their habit of alcohol consumption as a relief for their
e with the results obtained from the studies of Matthew
studies examined the relationship between motives for drinking and use of alcohol
may depend on the protective behavior of the college students. This protective behavior
strategy positively reflected on social and enhancement motives and not mediated the
relationship with alcohol related problems and coping motives on negative side also.
4.2.2 that after psychosocial education there is a
t reduction insub scale coping motives on depressed or nervous students.
The results reveal that when students are depressed or nervous they opt drinking to cope up
stress, depression and nervousness. If the above reasons are accountable for drinking
ionally, the researcher feels that education will surely help them .It should be noted that
special consultation and rehabilitation should follow education. After the education they
dents changed their
attitude towards drinking. . Later it is evident that students viewed alcohol to be a drug that
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
can depress the central nervous system and slow down the brain functions. They became
conscious of its ill effects and how they turned alcoholic. The above table indicates that
74.7% of students stopped drinking after the alcohol education. The mode scores of
respondents is one after the education
Findings of Longabaugh Richard and Morgenstern Jon (1999)13in their study reported
that alcohol abuse might be effectively prevented among high risk individuals with a brief CB
coping skills therapy approach targeting high Anxiety Sensitivity, and that anxiety sensitivity
may operate as one underlying determinant of dysfunctional drinking behavior. The brief
cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) intervention was conducted and proved that 50% of
reduction was noticed in their study.
In question no.15 does drinking makes you confident or sure of yourself on sub scale coping motives
(COP) after psychosocial educationillustrates that 89.8% of the students stopped drinking for this
particular reason
On DMQ-R question 17 to forget about your problems on sub scale coping motives (COP)after
alcohol education 92% of the students stopped drinking and started alternative ways to cope up with
their daily issues. Careys and Correia study concluded that motives worked as leading to heavy
drinking and to account for drinking problems. (Carey K B, C J Correia 1997) 7The findings of the
present study indicate the same as Careys and Correia study conclusions. Cooper, Frone, Russell,
and Mudar (1995)14 established that coping motives were more proximal determinants of alcohol
consumption and related problems in adolescents and adults from the general community than the
negative mood states thought to underlie coping drinking, but in the present study the respondents
scored on social motives than coping motives.
Table-4.2.3the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R- on sub scale Conformity motives.
(CON)before psychosocial education
CON- before
education
Q2 Q8 Q12 Q19 Q20
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 6 2.7% 13 5.8% 1 .4% 6 2.7% 4 1.8%
Some of the
time (2)
21 9.3% 33 14.7% 4 1.8% 36 16.0% 15 6.7%
Half of the
time (3)
40 17.8% 35 15.6% 9 4.0% 45 20.0% 43 19.1%
Most of the
time (4)
74 32.9% 75 33.3% 123 54.7% 75 33.3% 87 38.7%
Almost always
(5)
84 37.3% 69 30.7% 88 39.1% 63 28.0% 76 33.8%
n 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 5.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
Figure-4.2.3the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R- on sub scale Conformity motives.
(CON)before psychosocial education
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
scale Conformity motives. (CON)before psychosocial education,
students said that always they were pressurized by their friends.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
so they don’t kid on you about not drinking on sub scale Conformity motives. (CON)
psychosocial education on the above table
others or show other students that they also drink and retain friendship. They say that it made them
feel proud, 30.7 percent students drank almost always and 33.3 percent students drank alcohol most of
the time for this reason on conformity motives.
On DMQ-R question no. question 12
motives. (CON), it is to be noticed that before education, more than 54% of the students agreed that
they drink in the interest of others. Most of the time they felt that it is better to have fun with t
friends.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
conformity motives. (CON)before psychosocial education
of student towards drinking. They stated that acceptanc
important for them
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
1 2
scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no.2- friend’s pressure to drink
before psychosocial education, it has been found that 37% of the
students said that always they were pressurized by their friends.
scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no.8- If accompany friends in drinking
about not drinking on sub scale Conformity motives. (CON)
psychosocial education on the above tableexplains that students drank most of the time to be with
they also drink and retain friendship. They say that it made them
feel proud, 30.7 percent students drank almost always and 33.3 percent students drank alcohol most of
the time for this reason on conformity motives.
R question no. question 12- to be in with a group you like, on sub scale Conformity
t is to be noticed that before education, more than 54% of the students agreed that
they drink in the interest of others. Most of the time they felt that it is better to have fun with t
scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no. 19- to be liked on sub scale
before psychosocial education on the table above highlights the attitude
of student towards drinking. They stated that acceptance and recognition within the group is very
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
friend’s pressure to drink on sub
it has been found that 37% of the
If accompany friends in drinking
about not drinking on sub scale Conformity motives. (CON) before
explains that students drank most of the time to be with
they also drink and retain friendship. They say that it made them
feel proud, 30.7 percent students drank almost always and 33.3 percent students drank alcohol most of
be in with a group you like, on sub scale Conformity
t is to be noticed that before education, more than 54% of the students agreed that
they drink in the interest of others. Most of the time they felt that it is better to have fun with their
to be liked on sub scale
on the table above highlights the attitude
e and recognition within the group is very
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
On DMQ-R question no. 20- so you won’t feel left out (CON) before psychosocial education, the
percentage scores of respondents on most of the time were 38.7% and 33.8% on almost always they
drink for this reason. So a total of 72% of students scored on the highest side. This shows that
drinking became an important part of students’ life to have to be with their peers.
Table-4.2.4the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R- on sub scale Conformity motives.
(CON)after psychosocial education
CON after
education
Q2 Q8 Q12 Q19 Q20
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 59 26.2% 151 67.1% 179 79.6% 166 73.8% 157 69.8%
Some of the
time (2)
138 61.3% 66 29.3% 41 18.2% 51 22.7% 65 28.9%
Half of the
time (3)
21 9.3% 5 2.2% 4 1.8% 8 3.6% 3 1.3%
Most of the
time (4)
6 2.7% 2 .9% 1 .4% 0 0% 0 0%
Almost always
(5)
1 .4% 1 .4% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
n 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100 225 100.0
Mode 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Figure-4.2.4the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
(CON)after psychosocial education
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
to drink on sub scale Conformity motives. (CON)
revealed that 26.2% of the students stopped drinking and 61.35% tasted it occasionally with
their friends.
According to Cooper 199415study on
and validation of a four-factor model in journal Psychological
conformity (external/negative) motives aim to avoid unpleasant social situations (e.g. rejection by a
valued group) and to obtain social rew
be an outsider, this is clearly evident in the results from the present study also.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
on sub scale Conformity motives. (CON)
drinking level reduced and 67.1% of students stopped completely. A significant reduction in alcohol
intake is visible from the table given
Mezquita L. et al (2011)16in their study reported that the relationship between conformity motives
and alcohol use variables has been studied mainly among adolescents. Although conformity motives
may hypothetically be positively related to alcohol use, some studies have foun
association with drinking levels, but a positive association with alcohol
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
1 2
scores of respondents on DMQ-R- on sub scale Conformity motives.
after psychosocial education
scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no.2 Does friends pressure you
on sub scale Conformity motives. (CON)after psychosocial education,
that 26.2% of the students stopped drinking and 61.35% tasted it occasionally with
study on Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: Development
factor model in journal Psychological Assessment, explained about
conformity (external/negative) motives aim to avoid unpleasant social situations (e.g. rejection by a
valued group) and to obtain social rewards. This is the typical situation is of ’drinking in order not to
be an outsider, this is clearly evident in the results from the present study also.
scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no.8, If you drink others won’t kid you
scale Conformity motives. (CON) after educating them about alcohol and its effects, their
drinking level reduced and 67.1% of students stopped completely. A significant reduction in alcohol
intake is visible from the table given above.
in their study reported that the relationship between conformity motives
and alcohol use variables has been studied mainly among adolescents. Although conformity motives
may hypothetically be positively related to alcohol use, some studies have foun
association with drinking levels, but a positive association with alcohol-related problems. It is
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
on sub scale Conformity motives.
Does friends pressure you
after psychosocial education,the results
that 26.2% of the students stopped drinking and 61.35% tasted it occasionally with
adolescents: Development
Assessment, explained about
conformity (external/negative) motives aim to avoid unpleasant social situations (e.g. rejection by a
ards. This is the typical situation is of ’drinking in order not to
others won’t kid you
after educating them about alcohol and its effects, their
drinking level reduced and 67.1% of students stopped completely. A significant reduction in alcohol
in their study reported that the relationship between conformity motives
and alcohol use variables has been studied mainly among adolescents. Although conformity motives
may hypothetically be positively related to alcohol use, some studies have found a negative
related problems. It is
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
therefore possible that the role of conformity motives may vary across different alcohol related
behaviors, environments, or stages of drinking history. For instance, they may be important in
adolescents, probably in an interaction with specific contexts, such as drinking at parties, or drinking
to fit into a peer group that acts violently. They may also be quite important in causing relapses
among recovering alcoholics since clinical patients have reported relapses due to social pressure to
resume alcohol consumption. The evidence derived from clinical practice therefore shows that
training in drink refusal skills can be useful in helping prevent relapses among treated alcoholics. This
suggests that conformity motives should receive increased attention in the adult alcohol use literature.
Here in the present study we noticed that psychosocial education helped students to decrease their
alcohol consumption.
The table results above On DMQ-R question no. question 12 to fit in with others you drink, on sub
scale Conformity motives. (CON) after psychosocial education, show that a significant portion of
students reduced their drinking habits after education even they realized that they should abandon
alcohol drinking and not fall prey to alcohol. So 79.6 % of students stopped drinking. Once they
understood that the same fun can lead to addiction of alcohol, a major threat to their life. They
reduced their intake frequency and quantity and followed other alternative measures to fit into peer
group
Another research work by Nemeth Zsofia (2011),17The role of motivational components of alcohol
use among youth in different settings and cultures, based on the comparison of adolescents and
college students it was revealed that teenagers endorse significantly more motives with negative
outcome such as conformity and coping motives than young adults. This suggests that to fit into a
valued group and to escape from problems are important reasons for drinking among adolescents
compared to college students, also similar but it is shown more in adolescents.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R question no.20- If you don’t drink do you feel left
out (CON) after psychosocial education, the table above highlights the attitude of student towards
drinking. They stated that acceptance and recognition within the group is very important for them.
After explaining about how it can lead to alcoholism, they accepted their ignorance about drinking
and addiction. They assured that they would keep away from alcohol which ruins their lives and
69.8% of them decided no to alcohol drinking.
A study by Kuntsche, Stewart, and Cooper 20086on How Stable Is the Motive–Alcohol Use Link?
Indicates that the rank order in mean levels of motive endorsement was the same across countries i.e.,
highest for social, followed by enhancement, coping, and conformity. The present study the highest
score same as theirs on social motives but second highest score not on enhancement but on
conformity motives. This shows that motives for drinking influence the culture of the people.
Table-4.2.5 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale social motives (SOC)
before psychosocial education
SOC before
education
Q3 Q5 Q11 Q14 Q16
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 18 8.0% 12 5.3% 1 .4% 1 .4% 2 .9%
Some of the
time (2)
21 9.3% 26 11.6% 40 17.8% 17 7.6% 7 3.1%
Half of the
time (3)
40 17.8% 7 3.1% 59 26.2% 24 10.7% 3 1.3%
Most of the
time (4)
65 28.9% 71 31.6% 69 30.7% 109 48.4% 61 27.1%
Almost always
(5)
81 36.0% 109 48.4% 56 24.9% 74 32.9% 152 67.6%
n 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 5.00 5.00 4.00 4.00 5.00
Figure-4.2.5 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
before psychosocial education
Table-4.2.5 and figures on DMQ-
before psychosocial education it is seen that alcohol is served lavishly in all functions. It has become
a common practice among all sections of society. It is a false notion that alcohol helps people to
enjoy a party. More than 64% of the students on the higher side were dr
needed psychosocial education is to spell out doubts and myths about alcohol. So they stay away from
alcohol misuse.
OnDMQ-R 5- To be sociable on social motives (SOC) before psychosocial education
students believed that it helps socializing. In reality it adversely affected their lives
study on Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Collegiate Contexts given greater
ideas about how students influenced by their peers
importance in "peer-intensive" college contexts, for example, undergraduate and residential
institutions where students lack frequent contact with parents
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
1 2
scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale social motives
-R 3- Is drinking helps enjoying a party on social motives (SOC)
it is seen that alcohol is served lavishly in all functions. It has become
a common practice among all sections of society. It is a false notion that alcohol helps people to
enjoy a party. More than 64% of the students on the higher side were drinking for this reason. Here
needed psychosocial education is to spell out doubts and myths about alcohol. So they stay away from
To be sociable on social motives (SOC) before psychosocial education
ved that it helps socializing. In reality it adversely affected their lives One of Perkins
study on Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Collegiate Contexts given greater
ideas about how students influenced by their peers. Furthermore, peer norms may be of particular
intensive" college contexts, for example, undergraduate and residential
institutions where students lack frequent contact with parents (Perkins Wesley H. 2002
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
R on sub scale social motives (SOC)
Is drinking helps enjoying a party on social motives (SOC)
it is seen that alcohol is served lavishly in all functions. It has become
a common practice among all sections of society. It is a false notion that alcohol helps people to
inking for this reason. Here
needed psychosocial education is to spell out doubts and myths about alcohol. So they stay away from
To be sociable on social motives (SOC) before psychosocial education 48.4 % of the
One of Perkins
study on Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Collegiate Contexts given greater
peer norms may be of particular
intensive" college contexts, for example, undergraduate and residential
Perkins Wesley H. 2002)18
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
On DMQ-R question no.11- Does drinking makes social gatherings more fun on social motives
(SOC) before psychosocial education on the above table proves the social motives of drinking. Prior
to education the students reported that gatherings are fun filled with drinks like alcohol. They
admitted to having kept no control over themselves and this disrupted their normal work, the next
day. They told that, in the above mentioned situations, they didn’t drink often but rarely as it excited
them .Fifty four percent was on the higher side (most of the time30.7% and almost always24.9%). A
study byCarey, Social gatherings and drinking make students enjoy and this is directly linked to high
risk drinking among college. (Carey, K. B. 1995). 19
Table-4.2.5 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R 14- Does drinking improves parties
and celebrations on social motives (SOC) before psychosocial education students were under the
impression that parties and celebrations are more fun with alcohol servings. There were many students
on the higher side of drinking, most of the time- 48.4% and almost always -32.9%. The picture
before education - at the higher level 80%, at the moderate level is 10.7% and at the lower side was
(some of the time) 7.6%. According to Stewart and others sharing a social occasion motivates the
students to drink and celebrate. When it becomes a regular habit among students they may get in to
problems. (Stewart S H et al, 1996) 20these same findings we see inCooper’s study also. (Cooper
1994) 15 their findings were very much similar to the present study.
Table-4.2.5 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ- 16 Drinking in celebrating a special
occasion with friends on social motives (SOC) before psychosocial education explains about special
occasions with friends as the social motive that initiates students to drinking. This question scored the
highest with respect to other questions. 27.1 % chose the option - most of the time and 67.6%
chose- almost always option. The total percent on high drinking (27.1+67.6) is 94%. Alcohol offers
represent a more direct form of social pressure that may uniquely motivate drinking behaviors (Read
et al. 2003), 21 this was an obvious statement that reflected in the present study also.
Table-4.2.6 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale social motives (SOC)
after psychosocial education
SOC after
education
Q3 Q5 Q11 Q14 Q16
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 144 64.0% 129 57.3% 150 66.7% 152 67.6% 49 21.8%
Some of the
time (2)
73 32.4% 76 33.8% 55 24.4% 58 25.8% 83 36.9%
Half of the
time (3)
6 2.7% 16 7.1% 19 8.4% 14 6.2% 84 37.3%
Most of the
time (4)
2 .9% 1 .4% 1 .4% 1 .4% 4 1.8%
Almost always
(5)
0 0% 3 1.3% 0 0% 0 0% 5 2.2%
n 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00
Figure-4.2.6 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale social motives (SOC)
after psychosocial education
Table-4.2.6 & figures on DMQ-R question no.3
motives (SOC) after psychosocial education
habits. Psychosocial education helped them to understand about alcohol problems.
According to Kuntsche Emmanuel
Ther factors like hisory, present situation and thinking patterns influences the chemical effects of
drinking. Also, drinking when eating food may have less chemical effects but again the frequency
and the quantity of drinking may again cotribute to negative effects on the health of the person.
Table-4.2.6 & figures on DMQ-R question no.5
motives (SOC) after psychosocial education they understood
about the facts and myths about alcohol use.. Real facts changed their belief about alcohol
changed their drinking habits on social motives.
On DMQ-R 11- drinking in social gatherings makes fun (SOC)
said that they drank within limits and their report also showed reduction in their drinking levels i.e.
66.7 %.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQR
(SOC),Drinking in limited quantity is fun, is a common thought but in most cases alcohol takes
control of the drinkers. After explaining about how alcohol mi
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
1 2 3
R question no.3- Does drinking helps you enjoy a party on social
motives (SOC) after psychosocial education a good proportion of students reduced their drinking
helped them to understand about alcohol problems.
Emmanuel, Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., &Engels., R. (2005).22
Ther factors like hisory, present situation and thinking patterns influences the chemical effects of
drinking. Also, drinking when eating food may have less chemical effects but again the frequency
and the quantity of drinking may again cotribute to negative effects on the health of the person.
R question no.5 – Does drinking makes to be sociable on social
motives (SOC) after psychosocial education they understood about alcohol related problems and
about the facts and myths about alcohol use.. Real facts changed their belief about alcohol
changed their drinking habits on social motives.
drinking in social gatherings makes fun (SOC)after psychosocial education
said that they drank within limits and their report also showed reduction in their drinking levels i.e.
scores of respondents on DMQR-14 Drinking improves parties and celebrations
Drinking in limited quantity is fun, is a common thought but in most cases alcohol takes
control of the drinkers. After explaining about how alcohol misuse can play havoc in their lives,
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
Does drinking helps you enjoy a party on social
a good proportion of students reduced their drinking
Ther factors like hisory, present situation and thinking patterns influences the chemical effects of
drinking. Also, drinking when eating food may have less chemical effects but again the frequency
and the quantity of drinking may again cotribute to negative effects on the health of the person.
to be sociable on social
about alcohol related problems and
about the facts and myths about alcohol use.. Real facts changed their belief about alcohol and they
after psychosocial education they
said that they drank within limits and their report also showed reduction in their drinking levels i.e.
14 Drinking improves parties and celebrations
Drinking in limited quantity is fun, is a common thought but in most cases alcohol takes
suse can play havoc in their lives,
students changed their attitude and they decided they will not misuse alcohol. Quite a lot of students
reduced their drinking level to moderate level.
On DMQR- 16 to celebrate a special occasion with friends (SOC)after psychosocial education, it
may be rare, but if they drink above standard level, it will be dangerous for their health.
Psychosocial education explained how alcohol misuse can lead to problems. If alcohol or beverages
are wisely used it will not cause problems. The results of above table denote that education did not
have much impact on respondents but they well understood about alcohol misuse and its
consequences. Above table shows that on special occasion students like to enjoy drinking along with
friends in a moderate way. It occurs once in a while.
Table-4.2.7 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
(ENH) before psychosocial education
ENH before
education
Q7
No. %
Never (1) 13 5.8%
Some of the
time (2)
43 19.1%
Half of the
time (3)
27 12.0%
Most of the
time (4)
93 41.3%
Almost always
(5)
49 21.8%
n 225 100.0
Mode 4.00
Fugure-4.2.7 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
motives (ENH) before psychosocial education
On DMQ-R question 7 because you like the feeling on enhancement motives
psychosocial education we understand that 41.3% of students like the feeling
question reveals how easily people become alcohol addicts. Binge drinking and its consequences are
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
50.00%
1 2
scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale enhancement motives
psychosocial education
Q9 Q10 Q13 Q18
No. % No. % No. % No.
15 6.7% 20 8.9% 2 .9% 6
41 18.2% 98 43.6% 4 1.8% 20
56 24.9% 47 20.9% 44 19.6% 55
83 36.9% 39 17.3% 100 44.4% 81
30 13.3% 21 9.3% 75 33.3% 63
225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225
4.00 2.00 4.00 4.00
scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale enhancement
psychosocial education
because you like the feeling on enhancement motives
we understand that 41.3% of students like the feeling - most of the time, this
question reveals how easily people become alcohol addicts. Binge drinking and its consequences are
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
R on sub scale enhancement motives
Q18
No. %
6 2.7%
20 8.9%
55 24.4%
81 36.0%
63 28.0%
225 100.0
4.00
scale enhancement
(ENH) before
most of the time, this
question reveals how easily people become alcohol addicts. Binge drinking and its consequences are
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
common among people of this sort. It is here that education plays a major role in preventing such
problems.
On DMQR- 9 Drinking makes exciting on ENHbefore psychosocial education36.9% students who
drank most of the time for getting excitement
On DMQR- 10 to get high (ENH) before psychosocial education shows that there is a significant
reduction in alcohol use after education. From the above table it is clear that sometimes very few
students drink to get high, for fun or in the face of depression or anger. In these situations they are
unaware of the harmful effects of drinking. Read et al. 200321 study on examining the Role of
Drinking Motives in College Student Alcohol Use and Problems; certain character in students like
impulsive behavior or sensation seeking, can always leads heavy drinking or risk drinking
On DMQR-13 Drinking for pleasant feeling (ENH)before psychosocial education 44.4% of students
drank most of the time on this reason.
The percentage scores of respondents on DMQR 18- Does drinking is fun (ENH)before psychosocial
education 36.0% on most of the time and 28.0% on almost always, they drank for this reason.
Table-4.2.8 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale enhancement motives
(ENH) after psychosocial education
ENH after
education
Q7 Q9 Q10 Q13 Q18
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Never (1) 95 42.2%
Some of the
time (2)
91 40.4%
Half of the
time (3)
24 10.7%
Most of the
time (4)
10 4.4%
Almost always
(5)
5 2.2%
n 225 100.0
Mode 1.00
Figure-4.2.8 the percentage scores of respondents on DMQ
(ENH) after psychosocial education
On DMQ-R question 7 when you drink
psychosocial education, the percent went down to 4.4% on most of the time and 2.2% on almost
always. This question reveals how easily people become alcohol addicts. Binge drinking and its
consequences are common among people because they like drinking. It is here that education plays a
major role in preventing such problems
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
1 2
170 75.6% 202 89.8% 106 47.1% 174
50 22.2% 23 10.2% 102 45.3% 31
3 1.3% 0 0% 16 7.1% 18
2 .9% 0 0% 1 .4% 1
0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 1
225 100.0 225 100.0 225 100.0 225
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
scores of respondents on DMQ-R on sub scale enhancement
psychosocial education
R question 7 when you drink you like the feeling on enhancement motives
the percent went down to 4.4% on most of the time and 2.2% on almost
als how easily people become alcohol addicts. Binge drinking and its
consequences are common among people because they like drinking. It is here that education plays a
major role in preventing such problems
3 4 5
Never (1)
Some of the time (2)
Half of the time (3)
Most of the time (4)
Almost always (5)
174 77.3%
31 13.8%
18 8.0%
1 .4%
1 .4%
225 100.0
1.00
R on sub scale enhancement motives
you like the feeling on enhancement motives (ENH) after
the percent went down to 4.4% on most of the time and 2.2% on almost
als how easily people become alcohol addicts. Binge drinking and its
consequences are common among people because they like drinking. It is here that education plays a
On DMQR- 9 Drinking is exciting on ENHafter psychosocial education has come down to 9%.
Above table results show how students changed their mindset after the psychosocial education. They
considered drinking to be a normal affair, a means to enjoyment and merrymaking, despite all
problems. . They would consider the frequency of intake and only moderate quantity will be
consumed.
On DMQR- 10 Do you drink to get high (ENH) after psychosocial education shows that there is a
significant reduction in alcohol use after education
On DMQR-13 is drinking gives you a pleasant feeling (ENH)after psychosocial education came down
to.4% after education. Most of the time they drank alcohol beverages to feel good. Once they
understood the consequences of continuous drinking they reduced their drinking to a low level. The
percentage scores of respondents on DMQR 18- Drinking is fun (ENH)after psychosocial education
drinking came down to .4%. Alcohol addiction is common among people but once they are aware of
the dangers involved, they are open to other positive alternatives. They show readiness stop alcohol
misuse. Observations from the above table results clearly state that alcohol education can make a
change in the attitude of college students. Drinking to have fun and to get drunk, motives as predictors
of weekend drinking over and above usual drinking habits, Drug and Alcohol dependence, points to a
heavy episodic weekend drinking culture of young people who drink large quantities on Friday and
Saturday nights apparently because they are seeking fun and excitement. Preventive measures should
aim to counteract young people's drinking at peak times and in high-risk situations.
Kuntsche and colleagues article on why do young people drink? In this article they have reviewed
student’s attitudes to drinking and its consequences. They calculated 15 years of studies in students
drinking and have come to a conclusion that social motives are used for moderate drinking and
enhancement motives are used for heavy drinking. (Kuntsche, E., Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., &Engels.,
R. 2005).22 this insight was very much helped the present study to use appropriate way to find out the
accurate results.
Another study by Kuntsche Emmanuel, Stewart, and Cooper 20086 also given valued
pointsto put in to the present study. According to famous researchers findings in this field
is that drinking motives can be considered proximal antecedents of drinking behavior and
have been shown to predict alcohol consumption and alcohol-related consequences
(Cooper, Frone, Russell, &Mudar, 1995) 14 encouraged the researcher in this work.
4.3 The percentage score of respondents on AUDIT (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test)
In the AUDIT, Questions 2 and 3 assume that a standard drink equivalent is 10 grams of alcohol
What’s a Low-Risk Limit?
* No more than two standard drinks a day
* Do not drink at least two days of the week
But remember. There are times when even one or two drinks can be too much – for example:
* When driving or operating machinery.
* When pregnant or breast feeding.
* When taking certain medications.
* If you have certain medical conditions.
* If you cannot control your drinking.
Ask your health care provider for more information.
What is Low-Risk Drinking?
Low-risk drinking involves limiting alcohol use to an amount and pattern that is unlikely to cause
harm to oneself or others. Scientific evidence indicates that the risk of harm increases significantly
when people consume more than two drinks per day and more than five days per week. Moreover,
even smaller amounts of alcohol pose risks in certain circumstances. Following the simple rules given
below can reduce the risk to your health and the possibility of hurting others.
� An average of two drinks a day
� In a week keep moderate drinking, maximum of 5 days in a week.
No to alcohol
� When driving
� When operating machinery
� When pregnant or breast feeding
� Under treatment conditions
� When unable to control drinking
Descriptive analysis of frequencies and mode scores of each item covered and reported them
from AUDIT as follows:
Table-4.3.1 the percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-1
Question No.1 Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial education
How often do you have a drink
containing Alcohol No. of
Respondents
Percentage No. of
Respondents
Percentage
Never (1) 0 0 66 29.3%
Monthly or less (2) 63 28.0% 144 64.0%
2 -4 times a month (3) 136 60.4% 15 6.7%
2-3-times a week (4) 26 11.6% 0 0
4 or more times a week (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 3.00 2.00
From the above table and pie chart we observe that, before education the frequency of drinking was 3
or 4 times a month, undoubtedly a high score. This finding illustrates that 60% of the respondents fall
in this category. The option, some of the time, was chosen by 28% and11.6% of the respondents
showed preference for two to three times a week. After education, the alternative some of the time
scored 64%, a high score. Before education the mode score on the higher side was 3 and after
education the mode score was 2.
Alcohol awareness education may help to understand what level for the people to continue their
drinking when they are in the range of 8 to 15. This range may not be harmful but long time drinking
may cause chronic problems in their health. Some times without knowing they may increase their
drinking and this will cause harm to them. (BaborF. Thomas and Higgins-Biddle C. John 2001) 23The study material Babor and co workers has been most useful for the psychosocial education in the
present study.
Table-4.3.2the percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-2
Question No. 2 Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial education
please tick on the amount of
drinks on a day when you drink
No. of
Respondents
Percentage No. of
Respondents
Percentage
1or2 (1) 37 16.4% 216 96.0%
3or4 (2) 150 66.7% 9 4.0%
5or6 (3) 34 15.1% 0 0
7-9 (4) 4 1.8% 0 0
10 or more (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 2.00 1.00
More than 66% of respondents used a minimum number of 3 or 4 drinks on a typical day for the past
one year. But it is observed that a huge majority of 96% came down in the number of drinks
consumed after the intervention. (After education, 96% of the respondents scored 1 or 2, at low levels.
The mode score was 2 before education and after education it dwindled to 1. Above table and pie
charts reveal that quantity in drinking came down to 96.0% among students.
The Audit questions 1 and 2 are very important in diagnosis and treatment process because this
quantity is calculated whether the person is under risk or not. (BaborF. Thomas and Higgins-Biddle
C. John 2001)23Similar way considered and given guidance to them.
Table- 4.3.3the percentages of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-3
Question No 3 Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial
education Do you drink 6 or more drinks and
how often?
No. of
Respondents
Percentage No. of
Respondents
Percentage
Never (1) 14 6.2% 225 100.0
less than monthly (2) 190 84.4% 0 0
Monthly (3) 20 8.9% 0 0
Weekly (4) 1 .4% 0 0
Daily or almost daily (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 2.00 1.00
With regard to the question asked the score for the options once in a month or less than
monthly is 84.4% in the past year. It shows the frequency in drinking is less than one month and
after psychosocial education it was reduced to never 100%. If a person drink more than 60 grams of
pure alcohol per occasion at any time of his drinking session, he needs to be given proper guidance
that it can lead to harm.. (BaborF. Thomas and Higgins-Biddle C. John 2001)23Education
concentrated on the above and removed the danger in drinking episodes.
Table-4.3.4The percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-4
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Q. 4 How often during the
past year have you found that
you were not able to stop
drinking once you had
started?
No. of Respond
ents
Percentage Percentage No. of
Respondent
s
Never (1) 19 8.4% 225 100.0
less than monthly (2) 118 52.4% 0 0
Monthly (3) 71 31.6% 0 0
Weekly (4) 17 7.6% 0 0
Daily or almost daily (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 2.00 1.00
Above table explain that, before education, the score for less than monthly and monthly drinking was
a high of 52.4% and 31.6% respectively. But after education the score on never was 100%. Mode
score was 2 before and 1 after education.
Table-4.3.5the percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-5
Question No.5- During the past
years, how often have you failed
to do what was normally
expected of you?
Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial
education
No. of
Respondents
Percentage Percentage No. of
Respondents
Never (1) 72 32.0% 225 100.0
less than monthly (2) 140 62.2% 0 0
Monthly (3) 13 5.8% 0 0
Weekly (4) 0 0 0 0
Daily or almost daily (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 2 1
Quite a lot of respondents, 62% of them chose not weekly or monthly but once or twice in the past
year and agreed to having failed to do what was normally expected of them. But after education,
drinking came down to the score nil 100%). The mode score on before psychosocial education was 2
that is 1 more than after psychosocial education.
Table-4.3.6The percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-6
Question No.6During the past year
did you need a first drink in the
morning to get yourself going after
a heavy drinking at night?
Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial
education
No. of
Respondents
Percentage No. of
Responde
nts
Percentage
Never (1) 210 93.3% 225 100.0
less than monthly (2) 15 6.7% 0 0
Monthly (3) 0 0 0 0
Weekly (4) 0 0 0 0
Daily or almost daily (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00
As seen in above table and charts, before education, respondents on less than monthly scored 6.7%
and on never scored 93.3% and after education the highest score was on never.
Table-4.3.7The percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-7
Question No.7- during the
past year did you feel guilt
or remorse after drinking?
Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial education
No. of
Respondents
Percenta
ge (%)
No. of
Respondent
s
Percentage
( %)
Never (1) 191 84.9% 225 100.0%
less than monthly (2) 27 12.0% 0 0
Monthly (3) 7 3.1% 0 0
Weekly (4) 0 0 0 0
Daily or almost daily (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00
Above table results shows that before education score for less than monthly is 12% and monthly score
is 3.1%. After education the highest score showed on never.
Table-4.3.8The percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-8
Question No. 8 Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial
education How often during the past year have you
been unable to remember what happened
the night before because you had been
drinking?
No. of
Responde
nts
Percentag
e
No. of
Respon
dents
Percenta
ge
Never (1) 201 89.3% 224 99.6%
less than monthly (2) 23 10.2% 1 .4%
Monthly (3) 1 .4% 0 0
Weekly (4) 0 0 0 0
Daily or almost daily (5) 0 0 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00
A few of the respondents felt that they were unable to remember what happened the night before
because they had been drinking. The score for less than monthly is 10.2% but after education the
score was 100% on never.
Table-4.3.9The percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-9.Because of
your drinking did you cause injury to self or others?
Question No. 9Because of your
drinking did you cause injury to
self or others?
Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial education
No. of
Respondents
Percentage No. of
Respondents
Percentage
No (1) 196 87.1% 225 100.0%
yes but not in the past year (2) 15 6.7% 0 0
Yes but during the past year (3) 14 6.2% 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00
The options past year and not in the past year scored 7%, before education caused injury to others
because of their drinking.
Table-4.3.10The percentage of students (frequency distribution) scores on AUDIT-10
Question No. 10 - Anybody said
that you are consuming alcohol is
harmful and you should cut down
on drinking?
Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial education
No. of
Respondent
s
Percentage No. of
Respondent
s
Percentage
No (1) 192 85.3% 225 100.0%
yes but not in the past year (2) 12 5.3% 0 0
Yes but during the past year(3 21 9.3% 0 0
n 225 100.0 225 100.0
Mode 1.00 1.00 Mode 1.00
The above table results clearly shows that 9.3% scored on yes during the past year and the option
notpast year scored 5.3% only.
The 1st three questions measure the quantity and frequency and the next 3 questions concentrated on
how far depended on drinking and the final 4 items concentrated on an inquiry about the recent
developments on lifelong alcohol related problems.
From the above results the overall AUDIT score stands for the first three questions with options -
moderate to high, before education, and after education all students to turn to low drinking. The
overall result of the other 7 questions did not score high. This means education is necessary for
students to understand their drinking habits and make changes in their alcohol intake. Heavy drinking
is associated with alcohol related disorders. Hingson et al. 2005, 2 Wechsler et al. 2002, 24 Perkins,
2002)18
These consequences show that education was essential for college students. The next two questions
also scored more than 60% on - less than monthly or monthly. This shows there was a possibility of
dependence on alcohol before education, except in the 6th question. In the last four questions scores
were low so there is no serious life time problem for the majority. Many research studies at college
level on alcohol use revealed that risk drinking should be controlled and regulated through proper
intervention and remedial measures. Some of the important one’s are as follows (Larimer et al 2002, 25 Kokotailo et al 2004,8 Nancy P Barnett 2007, 26 Monti et al 2005, 27 Peter Finn 1997, 28 Ralph
et al 2009)29
The question no. 4 - How often during the past year have you found that you were not able to stop
drinking once you had started? If we observe the results from table 4.2 4 and chart 4.2.7 we can see
that less than monthly score is 118 (52.4%) and monthly score is 71 (31.6) and weekly score is 17
(7.6), before psychosocial education. It reveals that almost all of the respondents were not able to
control their drinking. This indicates that they may face serious alcohol problems at any time. After
examining the questions and answers, the researcher provided appropriate education to make them
alert and conscious. This Endeavour made them aware of the consequences of uncontrollable
drinking. The researcher felt the need analyze this particular question, because dealing with this
question almost solved other problems.
4.4 Effect of psychosocial education tested by Paired‘t’ test
What is paired t-test?
A Paired is a statistical test that is performed if there is a significant difference between average
outcome measurements made before and after and intervention.
Paired t-test is used when following conditions exists.
Measurements must be made before and after an intervention on the same subjects, and
Measurements must be on a continuous scale and normally distributed
The paired t-test is used when measurements are taken from the subject before and after educational
sessions, questions and answers. In this study the researcher distributed questionnaire before and after
the psychosocial education among 225 male under graduate students chosen from a college to study
alcohol related problems. Testing, using this procedure eliminates individual sampling variations
because of the feasible sample and the observations on each person in the sample are taken before and
after the experiment.
It is necessary to check the normality assumption for each group separately.
Table-4.4.1
Effect of psychosocial education tested by Paired‘t’ test on each questions of Drinking Motives
Questionnaire Revised (DMQR) before and after the psychosocial education as follows:
Null hypothesis: the psycho- social education had no effect
Alternative Hypothesis: the psycho- social education has helped to reduce alcohol consumption
significantly.
Sl. No. Details of Questions Before and after psychosocial education t p
value
Pair 1
Do you drink to forget your worries (COP)- before and after
psycho social education
33.133 .000
Pair 2 Does your friends pressure you to drink (CON) Before and after
Psychosocial education
23.809 .000
Pair 3 Do you feel it helps you enjoy a party (SOC)- Before and after
Psychosocial education
25.476 .000
Pair 4 Does it help you when you feel depressed or nervous? (COP)
Before and after Psychosocial education
24.837 .000
Pair 5 Drinking helps you to be sociable (SOC) Before and after
Psychosocial education
26.499 .000
Pair 6 Does it cheer you up when you are in a bad mood (COP)
Before and after Psychosocial education
27.786 .000
Pair 7 Do you drink because you like the feeling (ENH) Before and
after Psychosocial education
18.758 .000
Pair 8 Others won’t kid you about not drinking (CON) Before and
after Psychosocial education
25.796 .000
Pair 9 Do you feel drinking is exciting (ENH) Before and after
Psychosocial education
23.375 .000
Pair 10 Do you drink to get high (ENH) Before and after Psychosocial
education
21.051 .000
Pair 11 Do you think it makes social gatherings more fun (SOC) Before
and after Psychosocial education
27.046 .000
Pair 12 Do you drink to fit in with a group you like (CON) Before and
after Psychosocial education
53.697 .000
Pair 13 Because it gives you a pleasant feeling (ENH) Before and after
Psychosocial education
38.397 .000
Pair 14 Do you think it improves parties and celebrations (SOC) Before
and after Psychosocial education
46.220 .000
Pair 15 Do you feel more self-confident and sure of yourself (COP)
Before and after Psychosocial education
31.721 .000
Pair 16 You drink to celebrate a special occasion with friends (SOC)
Before and after Psychosocial education
34.233 .000
Pair 17 Do you drink to forget about your problems (COP) Before and
after Psychosocial education
32.654 .000
Pair 18 Do you feel drinking is fun (ENH) Before and after Psychosocial
education
29.234 .000
Pair 19 To be liked (CON) Before and after Psychosocial education 28.788 .000
Pair 20 If you drink you won’t feel left out (CON) Before and after
Psychosocial education
39.885 .000
All p values are < 0.01
From the above table- 4.3.1, it is observed that‘t’ test scores on all the 20 questions on DMQR before
after education were significant , and all the P values are less than 0.01.
When we observe the t score of question number 12 – ‘Do you drink to fit in with a group you like
(CON) Before and after Psychosocial education, t = 53.697 was the highest score in comparison to
other questions. For question number 7- ‘Do you like the feeling?’ (ENH) we find that the lowest
score as 18.758.
In all the questions p value is < 0.01which suggests rejection of null hypothesis and acceptance of
alternative hypothesis. This implies that psychosocial education has significantly brought down the
level of consumption of alcohol among the sample. Findings from other studies supported that
interventions carried out in college students had positive effects. (McBride Nyanda et al. 2004)30
Paired difference of scores on Respondents drinking levels on 4 sub scales (coping motives
(COP), conformity motives (CON), social motives (SOC) & enhancement motives (ENH) of Drinking
Motives Questionnaire revised (DMQR) before and after psychosocial education as follows
Table-4.4.2
Drinking motives
ques. Revised
(DMQR)- Subscales
Before psychosocial
education
After psychosocial
education
‘t’ value
P
value Mean S.D Mean S.D
Coping motives
(COP)(5ques.) 18.4667 4.30220
5.8933 1.04249 41.064 .000
Conformity motives
(CON)(5ques.)
19.5556 2.76260 7.1244 1.47980 59.189 .000
Social motives
(SOC)(5ques.)
20.0667 3.02519 8.0356 1.97045 53.458 .000
Enhancement motives
(ENH)(5ques.)
17.2400 3.54628 7.1556 1.91977 36.016 .000
All p values are < 0.01
The above table result shows that there are significant differences in the scores on all the 4
subscales of DMQR before and after education (P values are less than 0.01) It is observed from the
above table that the mean values of coping motives 18.4667, conformity motives 19.5556, social
motives 20.0667 and enhancement motives 17.2400 before education were higher than that of on
coping motives 5.8933, conformity motives 7.1244, social motives 8.0356 and enhancement motives
7.1556 after education.
For the four subscales the alternative hypothesis is accepted at 1% level of significance. (p value
<0.01) this substantiates the above mentioned result that intervention education and personal
counseling helps students in having a healthy control over their consumption of drinks.
Drinking behavior is closely related to the mood, mostly negative emotions for heavy episodes of
drinking among college students. (Kuntsche, Emmanuel.,Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., & Engels., R.
(2005).22 Their study was an eye opener for the researcher to understand the student’s problems.
It may be concluded from the above table analysis that before psychosocial education, the motives
like coping, conformity, enhancement and social motives were related to high motives for alcohol
consumption and most probably there are chances for alcohol-related problems. Grant Valerie et al
200933 study on Coping-anxiety and coping-depression motives predict different daily mood-drinking
relationships, this finding is consistent with the present study and also similar to those of Hingson et
al. 2005,2 Wechsler et al. 200224,and Perkins, 200218 Their study also identified that heavy
drinking episodes among students are linked to all adverse outcomes in their life. The core problems
explained in many studies for preventing the young adults from alcohol misuse. (Borsari, Brian et al
2005, 31 Gilder and coworkers 2008, 32 Grant Valerie et al 2009, 33 Masayo Geshi et al,(2007,34
McCarty Dennis et al 2006, 35 Murphy et al, 2006, 36 Thadani et al 2009). 37
Enhancement and social motives have been found to predict negative alcohol-related consequences
indirectly. The relationship between these motives and consequences is mediated by amount of
alcohol consumed (Cooper et al., 1995, 14 Read et al., 2003)19. However, coping motives also predict
consequences directly proposed that individuals who drink to cope with negative affect should have
less control over cessation of drinking and therefore hypothesized the direct relationship between
drinking to cope and alcohol problems.
4.5Effect of intervention tested by Paired t teston Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test
(AUDIT)
Null hypothesis: the intervention did not have a significant influence on the drinking habits.
Alternative hypothesis: the intervention had a significant influence on the reducing the frequency
and quantity of alcohol consumption.
Table-4.5.1 Paired t test on each questions of Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT)
before and after psychosocial education
Sl.No. Details of Questions Before and after psychosocial education t P
value
Pair 1 How often do you have a drink containing alcohol? Before and after
psychosocial education
18.851 .000
Pair 2 How many drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when
you are drinking?
22.752 .000
Pair 3 How often do you have 6 or more drinks on 1 occasion? 37.855 .000
Pair 4 Have you found that in past years you were not able to stop drinking
once you had started?
27.741 .000
Pair 5 During the past years, how often have you failed to do what was
normally expected of you?
19.864 .000
Pair 6 How often during the past years have you had a first drink in the
morning to get yourself going after heavy drinking at night?
4.000 .000
Pair 7 Did you feel guilt or remorse after drinking during the past year? 5.934 .000
All p values are < 0.01
To test the efficacy of the psycho social education, paired t test was carried out for all the dependent
variables/ motives of drinking. All the variables show a significant difference between before and
after scores on AUDIT questions. (All p values < 0.05)
The above table results show there is a significant difference between responses and scores, before
and after the psychosocial education in alcohol related problems. All the questions are significant at
the degrees of freedom 224. The hypothesis that psychosocial education can bring down drinking
levels among college students is accepted. From the above table observations, psychosocial education
can play a significant role in eliminating drinking habits in college students. Creating awareness and
consciousness among students will reduce the wrong beliefs about alcohol. The disease aspect of
alcoholism gives a new hope to the students about their recovery process. Some of the research work
showed the similar results. (Hingson et al. 2005, 2 Weinrieb, R.M., and O’Brien, C.P. 1997) 38
According to Catherine and colleagues some students begin college with a habit of heavy drinking
but many others start drinking as soon as they enter the college. Results revealed from these results
that students who had a previous drinking history did report greater decreases in heavy drinking and
negative alcohol related consequences. (LovecchioP.Catherine, Wyatt, Todd M, DeJong, William
2010).39This study is similar in many points when comparing to the present study. Therefore the
researcher concludes that the psychosocial education was effective in this particular study.
Pair 8 How often during the past year have you been unable to remember
what happened the night before because you had been drunk?
4.748 .000
Pair 9 Have you or has someone else been injured as a result of your drinking? 5.415 .000
Pair 10 Anybody said that you are consuming alcohol is harmful and you should
cut down on drinking?
5.913 .000
4.6 ANOVA results for DMQ-R based on the socio-demographic variables before and after psychosocial
education
Here the researcher is taken Drinking motives questionnaire revised (DMQ-R) on its subscales COP
(coping motives), CON (conformity motives), SOC (social motives) and ENH (enhancement motives)
before and after psychosocial education
Table 4.6.1
ANOVA results for the DMQR on its sub scale, based on their socio-demographic variable ‘age’
before and after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
COP 245.141 6 40.857 2.283 .037* COP 21.298 6 3.550 3.483 .003*
CON 186.218 6 31.036 4.442 .000* CON 21.990 6 3.665 1.705 .121
SOC 139.101 6 23.184 2.645 .017* SOC 30.093 6 5.015 1.302 .257
ENH 235.357 6 39.226 3.312 .004* ENH 23.170 6 3.862 1.049 .394
A p-value of 0.05 was taken to indicate statistical significance. All p-values less than 0.05 were considered
statistically significant
P=.05 *significant
From the above table we observed that subscale coping motives (COP) before education (.037) and after education
(.003) were statistically significant. The mean score was 40.857 and F value 2.283 with the difference of freedom
6 for before education which was higher than 3.550 as mean score and F value 3.483 and the same difference of
freedom level 6 after education on coping motives.
On conformity motives (CON) before education it was statistically significant (.000) in relation to age .But on the
same after education it was not statistically significant (.121) in relation to age. On social motives (SOC) before
education it was statistically significant (.017) in relation to age But on the same after education it was not
statistically significant (.257) in relation to age. On enhancement motives (ENH) before education it was
statistically significant (.004) in relation to age. But on the same after education it was not statistically significant
(.394) in relation to age. So before education age and all the subscales were statistically significant and after
education age and all the sub scales were not statistically significant except COP. COP which were statistically
significant in both before and after education.
Table 4.6.2
ANOVA results for the DMQR on its sub scale, based on their socio-demographic variable
‘Year’ before and after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
COP 1011.920 2 505.960 35.839 .000* COP 12.827 2 6.413 6.174 .002*
CON 406.996 2 203.498 34.683 .000* CON 7.476 2 3.738 1.718 .182
SOC 383.227 2 191.613 25.521 .000* SOC 22.569 2 11.284 2.957 .054*
ENH 518.827 2 259.413 25.058 .000* ENH 88.222 2 44.111 13.281 .000*
*P<0.05
On coping motives for drinking (COP) before education it was statistically significant (.000) in relation to socio-
demographic variable year and after education also it was statistically significant (.002) in relation to year.
On conformity motives (CON) before education it was statistically significant (.000) in relation to year
But on the same after education it was not statistically significant (.182) in relation to year. On social motives
(SOC) before education it was statistically significant (.000) in relation to year and after education also it was
statistically significant (.054) in relation to year. On enhancement motives (ENH) before education it was
statistically significant (.000) in relation to year and after education also it was statistically significant (.000) in
relation to year. This indicates that ‘year of study’ plays a key role in deciding motives like social motives,
enhancement motives, conformity motives and coping motives to take drinks to a harmful level. It can be
observed that it is the final year graduates
Table 4.6.3
ANOVA results for the DMQR on its sub scale, based on their socio-demographic variable course before
and after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
COP 213.680 2 106.840 6.032 .003* COP .107 2 .053 .049 .953
CON 106.889 2 53.444 7.403 .001* CON 1.182 2 .591 .268 .765
SOC 52.907 2 26.453 2.941 .055* SOC .116 2 .058 .015 .985
ENH 52.080 2 26.040 2.091 .126 ENH 27.449 2 13.724 3.818 .023*
*P<0.05
On COP before education it was statistically significant (.003) in relation to socio-demographic variable course
undergoing- B.Com, BBM or BCA’ but on the same after education it was not statistically significant (.953) in
relation to course
On conformity motives (CON) before education it was statistically significant (.001) in relation to course But on
the same after education it was not statistically significant (.765) in relation to course. On social motives (SOC)
before education it was statistically significant (.055) in relation to course But on the same after education it was
not statistically significant (.985) in relation to course On enhancement motives (ENH) before education it was not
statistically significant (.126) in relation to course and after education it was statistically significant (.023) in
relation to course
Table 4.6.4
ANOVA results for the DMQR on its sub scale, based on their socio-demographic variable
‘staying’ with the family or not’ before and after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
COP 3.778 1 3.778 .203 .652 COP .911 1 .911 .838 .361
CON 1.001 1 1.001 .131 .718 CON .179 1 .179 .081 .776
SOC 30.748 1 30.748 3.396 .067 SOC .259 1 .259 .066 .797
ENH 1.759 1 1.759 .139 .709 ENH .944 1 .944 .255 .614
On COP before education it was not statistically significant (.652) in relation to socio-demographic variable
staying with family or not staying with family and on the same after education also it was not statistically
significant (.361) in relation to staying with family or not staying with family
On conformity motives (CON) before education it was not statistically significant (.718) in relation to staying
with family or not staying with family and on the same after education also it was not statistically significant
(.776) in relation to staying with family or not staying with family . On social motives (SOC) before education it
was not statistically significant (.067) in relation to staying with family or not staying with family and on the same
after education also it was not statistically significant (.797) in relation to staying with family or not staying with
family On enhancement motives (ENH) before education it was not statistically significant (.126) in relation to
staying with family or not staying with family and after education it was statistically significant (.614) in relation
to staying with family or not staying with family
We may conclude that the influence of drinking motives on these youth does not differ significantly based on
whether they stay with their family or away from the family. It is indeed a depressing fact that the family members
are not able to control and guide many of the times when their ward is in need of a moral support.
Similar finding found in Perkins Wesley H. 200218 studies on Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol
Misuse in Collegiate Contexts It was observed that friends have more influence on their behavior pattern than
family members.
Table 4.6.5
ANOVA results for the DMQR on its sub scale, based on their socio-demographic variable ‘type of
family’ before and after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
Sum of
Squares df
Mean
Square F Sig.
COP 286.262 2 143.131 8.232 .000* COP 3.300 2 1.650 1.525 .220
CON 149.900 2 74.950 10.668 .000* CON .737 2 .368 .167 .846
SOC 3.785 2 1.893 .205 .815 SOC 15.152 2 7.576 1.968 .142
ENH 138.208 2 69.104 5.727 .004* ENH 10.287 2 5.144 1.401 .249
*P<0.05
On COP before education it was statistically significant (.000) in relation to socio-demographic variable types of
family but on the same after education it was not statistically significant (.220) in relation to types of family
On conformity motives (CON) before education it was statistically significant (.000) in relation to types of
family and on the same after education it was not statistically significant (.846) in relation to types of family
On social motives (SOC) before education it was not statistically significant (.815) in relation to types of family
and on the same after education it was not statistically significant (.142) in relation to types of family
On enhancement motives (ENH) before education it was statistically significant (.004) in relation to types of
family and after education it was statistically significant (.023) in relation to types of family
4. 7 ANOVA results for AUDIT based on their socio-demographic variables before and after
psychosocial education
Table 4. 7.1
Socio-demographic variablesAge with AUDIT- Before psychosocial education
Socio-demographic variablesAge with AUDIT - Before psychosocial education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 22.422 6 3.737 .631 .705
Within Groups 1290.173 218 5.918
Total 1312.596 224
Socio-demographic variablesAge with AUDITafter psychosocial education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 1.279 6 .213 .609 .723
Within Groups 76.250 218 .350
Total 77.529 224
Socio-demographic variablesYear with AUDIT -Before psychosocial
education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 44.329 2 22.164 3.88
0
.022*
Within Groups 1268.267 222 5.713
Total 1312.596 224
Socio-demographic variablesYear with AUDIT -After psychosocial education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups .329 2 .164 .473 .624
Within Groups 77.200 222 .348
Total 77.529 224
Socio-demographic variablescourse with AUDIT -Before psychosocial
education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 88.382 2 44.191 8.014 .000*
Within Groups 1224.213 222 5.514
Total 1312.596 224
Socio-demographic variablescourse with AUDIT -After psychosocial
education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups .436 2 .218 .627 .535
Within Groups 77.093 222 .347
Total 77.529 224
Socio-demographic variablesstaying with Family or not with AUDIT -
Before psychosocial education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 16.847 1 16.847 2.899 .090
Within Groups 1295.748 223 5.811
Total 1312.596 224
Socio-demographic variablesstaying with Family or not with AUDIT -After
psychosocial education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups .706 1 .706 2.050 .154
Within Groups 76.823 223 .344
Total 77.529 224
Socio-demographic variablesType of family with AUDIT -Before
psychosocial education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 18.579 2 9.290 1.594 .205
Within Groups 1294.016 222 5.829
Total 1312.596 224
Socio-demographic variablesType of family with AUDIT -After psychosocial
education
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 1.043 2 .521 1.513 .223
Within Groups 76.486 222 .345
Total 77.529 224
*P<0.05
From the above ANOVA table results, Year with AUDIT and Course with AUDIT before education, were
statistically significant. All other variables like age, staying with family or not, types of family with AUDIT
questions before and after education were not statistically significant. It was observed from the above table
results that after education none of these were significant. Most of the students who drink were staying away
from family. It was also observed from the table 4.4, that the socio demographic details of the respondents,
68% of them were not staying with family and 74.2% of the respondents were from nuclear family. The
results indicate that the type of family causes significant variation in the response to various responses to
AUDIT questions later on, after education they reduced drinking.
The results indicates that peer pressure, social gatherings, having fun to drink high, parties etc caused
drinking in frequency and quantity than the socio-demographic variables in the responses to the AUDIT
questions, later on, after education they reduced drinking. A study by Kokotailo and colleagues on Validity
of the alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test in College Students, also similar like this present study, they
also used the sample size and the use of students from a single health center attached to the universities. Their
study findings also indicated that students mostly influenced by their friends. (Kokotailo et al 2004).8
Similar opinions found in another study on preventing Alcohol Related Problems on Campus- Substance Free
Residence Halls (Peter Finn 1997)28 that strict monitoring can reduce alcohol misuse among college students.
Plant Moira’s “Risk-takers” also explained about the influence of peers in drinking habits (Plant Moira
1992)40
Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Collegiate Contexts by Perkins also explained very
clearly about peer norms influences (perceived friends' drinking norm and fraternity membership) alcohol
consumption than any other factors including religion, gender and parents' attitudes. (Perkins Wesley H.
2002)2
4.8 Chi -Square test results of DMQ-R
Chi -Square test was applied to find out whether there is any significant association
betweensociodemographic variables and DMQ-R before and after psychosocial education
Chi-square gives a measure of association between two variables.
The chi square test does not prove that a hypothesis is correct but it evaluates to what extent the data and the
hypotheses have a good fit
4. 8.1 Chi -Square test results for the sub scales of the drinking motives before and afterpsychosocial
education, based on their socio-demographic variables
AGE with DMQR
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-
Square
45.823a 36 .126 122.165a 96 .037*
COURSE with DMQR
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-
Square
19.177a 12 .084 56.574a 32 .005*
YEAR with DMQR
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-
Square
32.743a 12 .001* 119.685a 32 .000*
Living with family or not with DMQR
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-
Square
8.521a 6 .202 24.831a 16 .073
Type of family with DMQR
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-
Square
16.766a 12 .159 55.545a 32 .006*
*P<0.05
The Chi -Square tests above was applied to find out whether there exists any significant association
between factors like the age, course, year, living with family or not , type of family of college students
and the drinking motives questionnaire( revised DMQR), before and after the psychosocial education.
Here the researcher is trying to study whether any association exits between socio-demographic
variables and DMQR, before and after psychosocial education.
From the chi-square test output table it is clear that some of the motives has achieved a significance
level of 0.05 where p≤ 0.05., before and after education. This means the chi-square test is showing a
systematic association between the above variables at 95 % confidence level. Hence the null hypothesis
is rejected and we conclude that at 95% confidence level, Age, Year of study, course, family
background has all got an influence on the drinking motives.
While using these sample data, some of the results are not strong enough to conclude that there exists
statistically significant relationship between some of the socio-demographic variables with DMQR &
AUDIT, before and after psychosocial education. There seems to be a significant, but not strong
association between living withfamily with DMQR & AUDIT, before and after psychosocial
education
4. 9 Chi -Square test results of AUDIT questions
Table 4.9.1 Chi -Square test results for the AUDIT before and after psychosocial education,
based on their socio-demographic variables
AGE with AUDIT
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-
Square
85.016a 84 .448 11.001a 18 .894
Year with AUDIT
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-Square 54.668a 28 .002* 4.408a 6 .622
Course with AUDIT
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-Square 41.967a 28 .044* 10.473a 6 .106
Living with family or not with AUDIT
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-Square 10.683a 14 .711 2.280a 3 .516
Type of family with AUDIT
Before psychosocial education After psychosocial education
Test
applied
Value df Significance
level
Value df Significance
level
Chi-Square 44.695a 28 .024* 3.904a 6 .690
*P<0.05
From the above table values we observe that some of the socio-demographic variables
like age and living with family or not living with family, are not statistically significant
before and after education. On the other hand, we notice that other variables such as year,
course and type of family exhibit statistical significance before or after psychosocial
education. If we look at the variable year with AUDIT, we observe that there is statistical
significance in the score obtained - (.002), before psychosocial education. In the same
way we notice that variables like course and type of family with AUDIT scores (.044,
.024) respectively display statistical significance before education.
Another important factor we notice is that there is no statistical significant result in the
socio-demographic variables with AUDIT questions after education. Notable significance
was seen before education within year of study (.002), course (.
(.024)
4.10 The results of the relationship with various socio
psychosocial education
Figure-4.10.1 the relationship with Age & Staying with family or not on DMQR before
psychosocial education
The investigator investigated about the age of students and their living conditions, for further
observation and studies. The above bar chart shows a significant difference in the drinking motives of
the students in DMQR when compared to age, living
shows that if students stay with their family, there is a control in their drinking attitudes. Being with
friends motivates them to indulge in drinking for pleasure, since there is no elder or other family
member to take control over happenings.
Just for observation and for further studies the investigator investigated about the students’ age and
their living conditions. The above bar chart shows there is a significant difference in the drinking
motives of the students in DMQR when comparing with their age and living with the family and
living away from family. It shows if the students stay with family means there is a control in their
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
18 19sta
y w
ith
fa
mil
y a
nd
aw
ay
fro
m f
am
ily Relationship with age & Stay with family or not on DMQR
Live with family
demographic variables with AUDIT questions after education. Notable significance
was seen before education within year of study (.002), course (.044) and type of family
4.10 The results of the relationship with various socio-demographic variables on DMQ
4.10.1 the relationship with Age & Staying with family or not on DMQR before
The investigator investigated about the age of students and their living conditions, for further
observation and studies. The above bar chart shows a significant difference in the drinking motives of
the students in DMQR when compared to age, living with the family and living away from family. It
shows that if students stay with their family, there is a control in their drinking attitudes. Being with
friends motivates them to indulge in drinking for pleasure, since there is no elder or other family
mber to take control over happenings.
Just for observation and for further studies the investigator investigated about the students’ age and
their living conditions. The above bar chart shows there is a significant difference in the drinking
the students in DMQR when comparing with their age and living with the family and
living away from family. It shows if the students stay with family means there is a control in their
19 20 21 22 23 24
Age
Relationship with age & Stay with family or not on DMQR
Live with family Live away from family
demographic variables with AUDIT questions after education. Notable significance
044) and type of family
demographic variables on DMQ-R before
4.10.1 the relationship with Age & Staying with family or not on DMQR before
The investigator investigated about the age of students and their living conditions, for further
observation and studies. The above bar chart shows a significant difference in the drinking motives of
with the family and living away from family. It
shows that if students stay with their family, there is a control in their drinking attitudes. Being with
friends motivates them to indulge in drinking for pleasure, since there is no elder or other family
Just for observation and for further studies the investigator investigated about the students’ age and
their living conditions. The above bar chart shows there is a significant difference in the drinking
the students in DMQR when comparing with their age and living with the family and
living away from family. It shows if the students stay with family means there is a control in their
drinking attitudes. Probably when they are out of family and being with f
drinking.
A final social factor to consider is living situation. Researchers have found that living environment
affects drinking behaviors. Students with more supervision in their living environments, such as living
at home or a residence hall, were less likely to binge drink than those with little or no supervision in
their living environments
Figure-4.10.2
P > 0.05
From the above bar chart we observe that there is no significant(P > 0.05) difference
between their courses namely ,BCOM, BBM, and BCA) and corresponding levels of
study (1st year, 2nd year, and 3rd year).
4.11. Results of the drinking levels of the respondents on DMQ
Below tables and charts explains the drinking levels of respond
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
First year
11.11
Course and year of study of the students on DMQR
drinking attitudes. Probably when they are out of family and being with friends motivates them for
A final social factor to consider is living situation. Researchers have found that living environment
affects drinking behaviors. Students with more supervision in their living environments, such as living
a residence hall, were less likely to binge drink than those with little or no supervision in
From the above bar chart we observe that there is no significant(P > 0.05) difference
their courses namely ,BCOM, BBM, and BCA) and corresponding levels of
study (1st year, 2nd year, and 3rd year).
4.11. Results of the drinking levels of the respondents on DMQ-R sub scales
Below tables and charts explains the drinking levels of respondents on 4 sub scales
Second year Third Year
11.11 11.11
Course and year of study of the students on DMQR
BBM
B.Com
BCA
riends motivates them for
A final social factor to consider is living situation. Researchers have found that living environment
affects drinking behaviors. Students with more supervision in their living environments, such as living
a residence hall, were less likely to binge drink than those with little or no supervision in
BBM
B.Com
BCA
(coping motives (COP), conformity motives (CON), social motives (SOC) &
enhancement motives (ENH) of Drinking Motives Questionnaire revised (DMQR),
before and after psychosocial education as follows
Please notice the values for low drinking, moderate drinking and high drinking.
Low drinking- 1 &2 (Never, Sometimes)
Moderate drinking- (3) Half of the time
High drinking- 4&5 (Most of the time, Almost or always)
Table- 4.11.1 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale coping motives (COP) of
the DMQR before psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education on sub
scale coping motives (COP) on DMQR Respondents Percentage
High drinking 116.00 51.56
Moderate drinking 93.00 41.33
Low drinking 16.00 7.11
Grand Total 225.00 100.00
Figure-4.11.1
The above table and bar charts explain about coping motives, before education. The highest scores for
different levels are as follows: High drinking
drinking - 7.11%. The previous tables on coping motives namel
mood, scored the highest for its motivation to drink. For this reason, they drank
the time. The second factor that motivated drinking was
helps when you feel depressed or nervous, the forth was to feel more self
assurance and fifth was to forget about your problems. The above mentioned are the factors on sub
scale coping motives (COP). If we compare it with other subscales of DMQR we obse
students motivated to drink on social motives scored the highest 68%, second highest on conformity
motives 58.67%, third highest on coping motives 51.56, lastly on enhancement motives 26.22%
respectively.
Drinking for a longer period of time
drinking motives and helping them, may reduce dependence. Previous studies revealed that proper
education can reduce drinking (Cooper et al., 1992,
Table- 4.11.2 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
the DMQR after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education on sub
scale coping motives (COP) on DMQR
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
High drinking Moderate
drinking
51.56%
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on COP
(coping motives) before education
The above table and bar charts explain about coping motives, before education. The highest scores for
different levels are as follows: High drinking - 51.56%, Moderate drinking - 41.33% and Low
7.11%. The previous tables on coping motives namely, to cheer up when you are in a bad
mood, scored the highest for its motivation to drink. For this reason, they drank always or most of
. The second factor that motivated drinking was - to forget your worries, the third was
l depressed or nervous, the forth was to feel more self-confident and self
assurance and fifth was to forget about your problems. The above mentioned are the factors on sub
scale coping motives (COP). If we compare it with other subscales of DMQR we obse
students motivated to drink on social motives scored the highest 68%, second highest on conformity
motives 58.67%, third highest on coping motives 51.56, lastly on enhancement motives 26.22%
Drinking for a longer period of time definitely leads to dependence on alcohol. Concentrating on their
drinking motives and helping them, may reduce dependence. Previous studies revealed that proper
Cooper et al., 1992,41 Stewart et al., 1996,20Cooper, 1994).
4.11.2 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale coping motives (COP) of
DMQR after psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education on sub
scale coping motives (COP) on DMQR Respondents Percentage
Moderate
drinking
Low drinking
41.33%
7.11%
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on COP
(coping motives) before education
The above table and bar charts explain about coping motives, before education. The highest scores for
41.33% and Low
y, to cheer up when you are in a bad
always or most of
to forget your worries, the third was - it
confident and self-
assurance and fifth was to forget about your problems. The above mentioned are the factors on sub
scale coping motives (COP). If we compare it with other subscales of DMQR we observe that
students motivated to drink on social motives scored the highest 68%, second highest on conformity
motives 58.67%, third highest on coping motives 51.56, lastly on enhancement motives 26.22%
definitely leads to dependence on alcohol. Concentrating on their
drinking motives and helping them, may reduce dependence. Previous studies revealed that proper
Cooper, 1994).15
on sub scale coping motives (COP) of
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
Grand Total
Figure-4.11.2
In the above table results, showing drinking levels of respondents on coping motives after
education, low drinking scored the highest. This is a clear indication of ignorance on the part of
respondents about motivational intentions of drinking, before
how education can work out wonders to prevent alcohol misuse.
Table- 4.11.3 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
(CON) of the DMQR before psychosocial education
Before psychosocial
education on Conformity Respondents
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
High drinking Moderate
drinking
0.00
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on coping
motives (COP) after psychosocial education
0.00 0.00
2.00 0.89
223.00 99.11
225.00 100.00
In the above table results, showing drinking levels of respondents on coping motives after
education, low drinking scored the highest. This is a clear indication of ignorance on the part of
respondents about motivational intentions of drinking, before education. The above table shows that
how education can work out wonders to prevent alcohol misuse.
4.11.3 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale conformity motives
DMQR before psychosocial education
Respondents Percentage
Moderate
drinking
Low drinking
0.89
99.11
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on coping
motives (COP) after psychosocial education
In the above table results, showing drinking levels of respondents on coping motives after
education, low drinking scored the highest. This is a clear indication of ignorance on the part of
education. The above table shows that
on sub scale conformity motives
motives (CON)
High drinking 132.00
Moderate drinking 84.00
Low drinking 9.00
Grand Total 225.00
Figure-4.11.3
On conformity motives (CON), we observe that the score on high drinking is 58.67%, we on
moderate drinking is 37.33% and on low drinking is 4.00%. When we look at motives for drinking
among college students conformity motive scores come second. We see
happens for social motives and conformity motives.
Table- 4.11.4 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
(CON) of the DMQR after psychosocial education
0.00 10.00
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking4.00%
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on CON
(conformity motives) Before Psychosocial education
132.00 58.67
84.00 37.33
9.00 4.00
225.00 100.00
On conformity motives (CON), we observe that the score on high drinking is 58.67%, we on
moderate drinking is 37.33% and on low drinking is 4.00%. When we look at motives for drinking
among college students conformity motive scores come second. We see that most of the drinking
happens for social motives and conformity motives.
4.11.4 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale conformity motives
DMQR after psychosocial education
20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00
58.67%
37.33%
4.00%
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on CON
(conformity motives) Before Psychosocial education
On conformity motives (CON), we observe that the score on high drinking is 58.67%, we on
moderate drinking is 37.33% and on low drinking is 4.00%. When we look at motives for drinking
that most of the drinking
on sub scale conformity motives
After psychosocial education on
Conformity motives (CON)
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
Grand Total
Figure-4.11.4
In the above table results, showing drinking levels of respondents on Conformity motives (CON)
after education, low drinking scored the highest. This is a clear indication of ignorance on the part of
respondents about motivational intentions of drinkin
how education can work out wonders to prevent alcohol misuse.
On conformity motives, in response to the first question (if your friends pressurize you to drink), 69%
of respondents scored on most of the time
education. While replying to the second question on Conformity motives (others won’t kid you about
not drinking), 63% of the respondents scored on
question on conformity motives (to fit in with a group you like), 93% of the respondents agreed on
0.00 20.00
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
0.00
2.22
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on CON (conformity
motives) After Psychosocial education
Respondents Percentage (%)
0.00 0.00
5.00 2.22
220.00 97.78
225.00 100.00
In the above table results, showing drinking levels of respondents on Conformity motives (CON)
after education, low drinking scored the highest. This is a clear indication of ignorance on the part of
respondents about motivational intentions of drinking, before education. The above table shows that
how education can work out wonders to prevent alcohol misuse.
On conformity motives, in response to the first question (if your friends pressurize you to drink), 69%
most of the time. This states that they drank mostly for this reason
education. While replying to the second question on Conformity motives (others won’t kid you about
not drinking), 63% of the respondents scored on most of the time and always options. On third
stion on conformity motives (to fit in with a group you like), 93% of the respondents agreed on
20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
97.78
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on CON (conformity
motives) After Psychosocial education
In the above table results, showing drinking levels of respondents on Conformity motives (CON)
after education, low drinking scored the highest. This is a clear indication of ignorance on the part of
g, before education. The above table shows that
On conformity motives, in response to the first question (if your friends pressurize you to drink), 69%
mostly for this reason before
education. While replying to the second question on Conformity motives (others won’t kid you about
options. On third
stion on conformity motives (to fit in with a group you like), 93% of the respondents agreed on
this reason. On fourth question (to be liked)
the given motive and to the fifth question
that they drank for this reason. Conformity motives, on drinking for social reasons, which are often
reported by students are likely to weaken their maturity (
Table- 4.11.5 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
the DMQR before psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education on
Social motives (SOC)
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
Grand Total
Figure- 4.11.5
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
High drinking
68.00
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on SOC (social motives)
Before Psychosocial education
this reason. On fourth question (to be liked) - on Conformity motives 61% of respondents agreed with
the given motive and to the fifth question- (so you won’t feel left out), 71% of respondents replied
that they drank for this reason. Conformity motives, on drinking for social reasons, which are often
reported by students are likely to weaken their maturity (Cooper, 1994).15
4.11.5 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale social motives (SOC) of
DMQR before psychosocial education
Respondents Percentage (%)
153.00 68.00
55.00 24.44
17.00 7.56
225.00 100.00
Moderate drinking Low drinking
24.44
7.56
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on SOC (social motives)
Before Psychosocial education
on Conformity motives 61% of respondents agreed with
eel left out), 71% of respondents replied
that they drank for this reason. Conformity motives, on drinking for social reasons, which are often
on sub scale social motives (SOC) of
From the above table & figure we observe that 68% of the respondents used to drink most of the time
or always for social based motives before psychosocial education. In this particular study, the results
show that the highest number of respondents
question scores on this sub scale social motives. To begin with, the first question
enjoy a party scored 64% on the higher side (most of the time and almost/always) the second
question- To be sociable 79% scored
gatherings more fun scored 54%, the fourth question
80%, and the fifth question- To celebrate a special occasion with friends scored 94% respectively.
the respondents scored on the option mostly they drink for social reasons.
Table- 4.11.6 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
the DMQR after psychosocial education
After psychosocial education on
Social motives (SOC)
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
Grand Total
Figure-4.11.6
0.00
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
High drinking
0.00
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on SOC (social
motives) After Pstchosocial education
figure we observe that 68% of the respondents used to drink most of the time
or always for social based motives before psychosocial education. In this particular study, the results
show that the highest number of respondents is on social motives. Now let us move on to
question scores on this sub scale social motives. To begin with, the first question- It helps you
enjoy a party scored 64% on the higher side (most of the time and almost/always) the second
To be sociable 79% scored on the higher side, the third question- It makes social
gatherings more fun scored 54%, the fourth question- It improves parties and celebrations scored
To celebrate a special occasion with friends scored 94% respectively.
the respondents scored on the option mostly they drink for social reasons.
4.11.6 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale social motives (SOC) of
DMQR after psychosocial education
After psychosocial education on
Respondents Percentage (%)
0.00 0.00
14.00 6.22
211.00 93.78
225.00 100.00
Moderate
drinking
Low drinking
6.22
93.78
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on SOC (social
motives) After Pstchosocial education
figure we observe that 68% of the respondents used to drink most of the time
or always for social based motives before psychosocial education. In this particular study, the results
move on to look at each
It helps you to
enjoy a party scored 64% on the higher side (most of the time and almost/always) the second
It makes social
It improves parties and celebrations scored
To celebrate a special occasion with friends scored 94% respectively. So
on sub scale social motives (SOC) of
The above table & figure results shows that after education, the percentage score on social motives
came down to 93.78%. All the respondents changed their drinking habits and preferred the option
some of the time to most of the time
Table- 4.11.7
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
DMQR before psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education on
Enhancement motives (ENH)
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
Grand Total
Figure-4.11.7
The above table results show that on Enhancement Motives, the highest score 52.89% is on moderate
drinking, before education. It is also clear from the above tables that none of the sub scale motive
show such low scores. All scored on higher side, before e
52.89
20.89
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on ENH
(enhancement motives) Before Psychosocial education
figure results shows that after education, the percentage score on social motives
came down to 93.78%. All the respondents changed their drinking habits and preferred the option
some of the time to most of the time
evels of respondents on sub scale enhancement motives (ENH) of
DMQR before psychosocial education
Before psychosocial education on
Respondents Percentage (%)
59.00 26.22
119.00 52.89
47.00 20.89
225.00 100.00
The above table results show that on Enhancement Motives, the highest score 52.89% is on moderate
drinking, before education. It is also clear from the above tables that none of the sub scale motive
show such low scores. All scored on higher side, before education. In response to the first question on
26.22
52.89
20.89
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on ENH
(enhancement motives) Before Psychosocial education
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
figure results shows that after education, the percentage score on social motives
came down to 93.78%. All the respondents changed their drinking habits and preferred the option
on sub scale enhancement motives (ENH) of the
The above table results show that on Enhancement Motives, the highest score 52.89% is on moderate
drinking, before education. It is also clear from the above tables that none of the sub scale motive
ducation. In response to the first question on
Enhancement Motives- You like the feeling score on the higher side is 62% for the option (most of
the time and almost always), to the second question
question- To get high – the score is 26%, on the fourth question
score is77% and on fifth question-
options (most of the time and almost always) scored on drinki
education. Drinking for enhancement or coping motives always leads to heavy alcohol use and
alcohol-related problems (Grant 2009
and if students drink alcohol, this good feeling of drinking may lead to risk drinking.
and Kalsher, M.J. (1990) 42
Table- 4.11.8
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
DMQR after psychosocial education
After psychosocial éducation on
Enhancement motives (ENH)
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
Grand Total
Figure-4.11.8
From the above tables and figures it seems that after the
more aware and conscious about alcohol use and misuse and so they started drinking in low levels
4.00
96.00
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on ENH
(enhancement motives) After Psychosocial education
You like the feeling score on the higher side is 62% for the option (most of
the time and almost always), to the second question- It is exciting – the score is 49%, on the third
the score is 26%, on the fourth question - It gives you a pleasant feeling
It is fun – the score is 64% respectively. On the higher side the
options (most of the time and almost always) scored on drinking motives scale, before psychosocial
education. Drinking for enhancement or coping motives always leads to heavy alcohol use and
Grant 2009)33 Enhancement motives always represent a positive thinking
, this good feeling of drinking may lead to risk drinking.
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on sub scale enhancement motives (ENH) of
DMQR after psychosocial education
ial éducation on
Respondents Percentage (%)
0.00 0.00
9.00 4.00
216.00 96.00
0.00
From the above tables and figures it seems that after the psychosocial education, students became
more aware and conscious about alcohol use and misuse and so they started drinking in low levels
Percentage in drinking levels of respondents on ENH
(enhancement motives) After Psychosocial education
High drinking
Moderate drinking
Low drinking
You like the feeling score on the higher side is 62% for the option (most of
the score is 49%, on the third
It gives you a pleasant feeling– the
the score is 64% respectively. On the higher side the
ng motives scale, before psychosocial
education. Drinking for enhancement or coping motives always leads to heavy alcohol use and
Enhancement motives always represent a positive thinking
, this good feeling of drinking may lead to risk drinking. (Geller, E.S.,
on sub scale enhancement motives (ENH) of the
psychosocial education, students became
more aware and conscious about alcohol use and misuse and so they started drinking in low levels
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
High
drinking
High
drinking
Moderate
drinking
con before con after con before
22.22%26.22%
10.22%
0.00
year of study on conformity motives before and after psychosocial
4.12 Percentage score on drinking levels in conformity (CON) motives by Year of graduate
study before & after psychosocial education
CON
Before
Education
CON After
Education
High
drinking
High
drinking
year of
graduate
studies percentage percentage
1ST YEAR 22.22 0.00
2ND
YEAR 26.22 0.00
3RD
YEAR 10.22 0.00
Figure-4.12
Moderate
drinking
Moderate
drinking
Low
drinking
Low
drinking
con before con after con before con after
11.11%7.11
19.11%0.00%0.00%
0.02%
0.00%0.00%
4.00%
75.00%74.00%
71.00%
year of study on conformity motives before and after psychosocial
education
Percentage score on drinking levels in conformity (CON) motives by Year of graduate
ial education
CON After
Education
CON
Before
Education
CON After
Education
CON
Before
Education
CON After
Education
drinking
Moderate
drinking
Moderate
drinking
Low
drinking
Low
drinking
percentage percentage percentage percentage percentage
11.11 0.00 0.00 75.00
7.11 0.00 0.00 74.00
19.11 0.02 4.00 71.00
Percentage score on drinking levels in conformity (CON) motives by Year of graduate
CON After
Education
Low
drinking
percentage
75.00
74.00
71.00
In the above table we observe that there are statistically significant differences, in drinking on
conformity motives, between before and after education. This is due to the influence of education
imparted to them during the period of study. The students (1st year, 2nd year, and 3rd y
low drinkers in conformity motives, after psychosocial education.
4.13 Results of the respondents drinking levels on AUDIT before and after psychosocial
education
Table- 4.13.1 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
drink containing alcohol before and after psychosocial education
never
Monthly or less 18
2-4 times a month 37
2-3 times a week 11
Grand Total 66
Figure-4.13.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
never Monthly
or less
18
1
45
How often do you have a drink containing alcohol on AUDIT Before & After
Psychosocial education
that there are statistically significant differences, in drinking on
conformity motives, between before and after education. This is due to the influence of education
imparted to them during the period of study. The students (1st year, 2nd year, and 3rd y
low drinkers in conformity motives, after psychosocial education.
4.13 Results of the respondents drinking levels on AUDIT before and after psychosocial
4.13.1 Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on AUDIT -1 how ofte
drink containing alcohol before and after psychosocial education
1 1
45 63
84 14 135
14 1 26
144 15 225
2-4 times a
month
2-3 times a
week
37
11
84
1414
1
How often do you have a drink containing alcohol on AUDIT Before & After
Psychosocial education
low drinking
moderate drinking
high drinking
that there are statistically significant differences, in drinking on
conformity motives, between before and after education. This is due to the influence of education
imparted to them during the period of study. The students (1st year, 2nd year, and 3rd year) became
4.13 Results of the respondents drinking levels on AUDIT before and after psychosocial
1 how often you have a
moderate drinking
While addressing the question on the frequency of (How often they drink) drinking, 84% of the
respondents come under the category of drinking
This is the score before education. Those who drank alcohol on
education is 14%. In this study social motives scored high among the students who took to drinking.
Another study by Schroeder and colleagues
alcohol use among college students found that social influence was behind the drinking behavior.
(Schroeder M. Christine and Prentice A. Deborah 1998).
study and the goals of their study were the same. They investigated about the effects of
among undergraduate students and proved that education was effective. The present study also
showcases similar results.
Table- 4.13.2
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
do you have on a typical day when you are drinking before and after education
1 or 2 16.44%
3 or 4 63.11%
5 or 6 14.67%
7-9 1.78%
Grand Total 96.00%
Figure-4.13.2
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
1 or 2 3 or 4
16.44%
63.11%
0.00% 3.56%
How many drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when
you are drinking on AUDIT Before & After psychosocial education
While addressing the question on the frequency of (How often they drink) drinking, 84% of the
respondents come under the category of drinking - more than 2 times and less than 4 times a month.
This is the score before education. Those who drank alcohol on a basis of 3 times a week before
education is 14%. In this study social motives scored high among the students who took to drinking.
and colleagues on an article exposing pluralistic ignorance to reduce
e students found that social influence was behind the drinking behavior.
Schroeder M. Christine and Prentice A. Deborah 1998).43It is worthy to note that the present
study and the goals of their study were the same. They investigated about the effects of
among undergraduate students and proved that education was effective. The present study also
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on AUDIT- 2 how many drinks containing alcohol
typical day when you are drinking before and after education
0.00% 16.44%
3.56% 66.67%
0.44% 15.11%
0.00% 1.78%
4.00% 100.00%
5 or 6 7-9
14.67%1.78%
3.56% 0.44% 0.00%
How many drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when
you are drinking on AUDIT Before & After psychosocial education
low drinking
moderate drinking
While addressing the question on the frequency of (How often they drink) drinking, 84% of the
more than 2 times and less than 4 times a month.
a basis of 3 times a week before
education is 14%. In this study social motives scored high among the students who took to drinking.
exposing pluralistic ignorance to reduce
e students found that social influence was behind the drinking behavior.
It is worthy to note that the present
study and the goals of their study were the same. They investigated about the effects of education
among undergraduate students and proved that education was effective. The present study also
2 how many drinks containing alcohol
moderate drinking
This table illustrates the amount or quantity of alcohol intake on a typical day. They drank at
least 3 or 4 drinks mostly once scored before education. Each and every time a motive governed them
and depending on the nature of that motive there is variatio
that some kind of motive drives them to drinking habits. The motives mentioned in this study are
coping, conformity, social or enhancement and so on. This study was designed to explore the
behavioral and psychological consequences of correcting the misconceptions of students about their
attitudes towards drinking. After education, it is worthy to note that all of them changed their
attitudes towards drinking and drinking levels fell considerably.
Table- 4.13.3
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
drinks on 1 occasion before and after education?
never 6.22%
less than monthly 84.44%
monthly 8.89%
weekly 0.44%
Grand Total 100.00%
Figure-4.13.3
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
never less than
monthly
6.22%
84.44%
How often do you have 6 or more drinks on one occasion on
AUDIT Before & After Psychosocial education
This table illustrates the amount or quantity of alcohol intake on a typical day. They drank at
least 3 or 4 drinks mostly once scored before education. Each and every time a motive governed them
and depending on the nature of that motive there is variation in their drinking levels. It was observed
that some kind of motive drives them to drinking habits. The motives mentioned in this study are
coping, conformity, social or enhancement and so on. This study was designed to explore the
gical consequences of correcting the misconceptions of students about their
attitudes towards drinking. After education, it is worthy to note that all of them changed their
attitudes towards drinking and drinking levels fell considerably.
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on AUDIT -3 how often do you have 6 or more
drinks on 1 occasion before and after education?
6.22%
84.44%
8.89%
0.44%
100.00%
monthly weekly
8.89%0.44%
How often do you have 6 or more drinks on one occasion on
AUDIT Before & After Psychosocial education
low drinking
This table illustrates the amount or quantity of alcohol intake on a typical day. They drank at
least 3 or 4 drinks mostly once scored before education. Each and every time a motive governed them
n in their drinking levels. It was observed
that some kind of motive drives them to drinking habits. The motives mentioned in this study are
coping, conformity, social or enhancement and so on. This study was designed to explore the
gical consequences of correcting the misconceptions of students about their
attitudes towards drinking. After education, it is worthy to note that all of them changed their
3 how often do you have 6 or more
Responding to this question, 84.44% of the respondents scored on less than monthly (not even a
month). They revealed that at times they faced difficulty to cut down on drinking, so the counts
sometimes went up. At other times they had to cope with negative
changed not to drink above 4 or more and less than monthly, after education
Table- 4.13.4
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
you found that you were not able to stop
education
never 8.44%
less than monthly 52.44%
monthly 31.56%
weekly 7.56%
Grand Total 100.00%
Figure-4.13.4
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
never less than
monthly
8.44%
52.44%
How often during the past year have you found you were not able
to stop drinking once you had started on AUDIT Before & After
Responding to this question, 84.44% of the respondents scored on less than monthly (not even a
month). They revealed that at times they faced difficulty to cut down on drinking, so the counts
sometimes went up. At other times they had to cope with negative effects and peer pressure. They
changed not to drink above 4 or more and less than monthly, after education
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on AUDIT- 4 how often during the past year have
you found that you were not able to stop drinking once you had started? Before and after
8.44%
52.44%
31.56%
7.56%
100.00%
less than
monthly
monthly weekly
52.44%
31.56%
7.56%
How often during the past year have you found you were not able
to stop drinking once you had started on AUDIT Before & After
psychosocial education
low drinking
Responding to this question, 84.44% of the respondents scored on less than monthly (not even a
month). They revealed that at times they faced difficulty to cut down on drinking, so the counts
effects and peer pressure. They
4 how often during the past year have
drinking once you had started? Before and after
low drinking
52.44% of the respondents couldn’t stop their drinking
and 31.56% scored monthly before education, but after education all the respondents scored nil in this
particular question.
Table- 4.13.5
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents
you failed to do what was normally expected of you because of drinking? Before and after
education
never 32.00%
less than monthly 62.22%
monthly 5.78%
Grand Total 100.00%
Figure-4.13.5
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
never
32.00%
How often during the past year have you failed to do what was
normally expected of you because of drinking on AUDIT Before
and After Psychosocial education.
52.44% of the respondents couldn’t stop their drinking once they started drinking - less than monthly
and 31.56% scored monthly before education, but after education all the respondents scored nil in this
Percentage of drinking levels of respondents on AUDIT-5 how often during the past year have
you failed to do what was normally expected of you because of drinking? Before and after
32.00%
62.22%
5.78%
100.00%
less than
monthly
monthly
62.22%
5.78%
How often during the past year have you failed to do what was
normally expected of you because of drinking on AUDIT Before
and After Psychosocial education.
low drinking
less than monthly
and 31.56% scored monthly before education, but after education all the respondents scored nil in this
during the past year have
you failed to do what was normally expected of you because of drinking? Before and after
low drinking
From this study it is observed that a few students followed harmful drinking habits. After education,
they started to consume alcohol moderately. This proves that education can wipe away unwanted
habits to a great extent of drinking (McBride Nyanda et al., 2004).30 Some research results show
that those who do not attend college have greater drinking levels (O’Malley P. M & Johnston L. D.
2002).44The researcher concentrated only on male students, because the most problematic drinking in
colleges has been documented among men. Overall, male students tend to drink alcohol more
frequently and in larger quantities than female students. (Clements, 1998)45 Thus heavy drinking put
these students at the risk of negative alcohol-related consequences, during their college years.
Greater frequency of binge drinking has been associated with greater alcohol-related problems
(Carey, K. B. 199546,Wechsler et al. 2000) 47
On AUDIT questions 6, 7, 8, 9, &10 didn’t make much difference in before and after psychosocial
education. This revealed that from this small sample study, most of the students are in control of their
drinking but some of them were misused alcohol. But after education they also realized that they
should not indulge in harmful drinking.
4.14 Regression Analysis
Regression Analysis was performed to find out the dependency of drinking motives on drinking
disorder.
In an attempt to relate the various motives for a person to consume alcohol, the drinking motive
variables are regressed on the scores of AUDIT tool. AUDIT score is taken as dependent variable and
motives as independent variables, a multiple regression analysis is conducted to probe the influence of
the independent variables. Stepwise regression was performed using SPSS software. Step wise
regression will exclude irrelevant variables.
Here the findings are about what is the statistical significance between DMQR and AUDIT questions
before psychosocial education. For psychosocial education it was very necessary to know about the
particular motives behind their alcohol use.
1. COP �AUDIT
AUDIT =0.507 + 15.062 COP (DMQ-R question no. 17)
COP (Coping motives) on DMQ-R question no. 17 ‘To forget one’s problems’ have
significant influence on drinking disorder (To forget about your problems had a significant
regression coefficient 0.507 with AUDIT variables) All the other 4 questions were excluded
because they didn’t have significant regression with alcohol use before psychosocial
education.
2. CON � AUDIT
AUDIT =0.33 + 14.375 + 0.307 CON (DMQ-R question no.2 and 8)
CON (conformity motives) on DMQ-R question no.2 ‘because friend’s/ peer pressure to
drink’ and question no. 8 ‘so that others won’t kid you about not drinking’ shows a significant
correlation with drinking disorder; the regression coefficient 14.375 (question no.2 ‘because
friend’s/ peer pressure to drink’) also was significant.
Yet another concern was that ‘others won’t kid you about not drinking’ which has regression
coefficient + 0.307 on AUDIT questions. All the other 3 questions on CON were excluded
because they didn’t have significant regression with alcohol use before psychosocial
education.
3. SOC�AUDIT
AUDIT = 0449 + 0.475 + 13.043 SOC (Social motives) on DMQ-R question no.5
‘To be sociable’ shows a significant cause for drinking disorder with regression coefficient
+0.475 and question no. 14 ‘because it improves parties and celebrations’ +13.043 has a
regression coefficient +0.449 which implies that these are the two factors which
instigates drinking among adolescent
4. ENH�AUDIT
AUDIT = 0.378 + 0.393 +14.156
ENH (Enhancement motives) on DMQ-R question no. 10 ‘to get high’
The most significant motive happens to be ‘To get high’ with regression coefficient +0.393
and the second significant variable was question no.13 ‘because it gives you a pleasant
feeling’ with a coefficient +0.378.
When it came to regression after psychosocial education no variable became relevant for
any of the 4 sub scales of DMQR and AUDIT questions.
Table 4.15
SUMMARY OF HYPOTHESES TEST
No HYPOTHESES
OF THE STUDY
TEST
APPLIED
SIGNIFI-CANCE LEVEL
DMQ-R AUDIT
Before
edu
After
edu
Before
edu
After
edu.
1 There are no significant differences
between the graduate students of 1st
year, 2nd year and 3rd year regarding
effects of alcohol usage.
Chi - Square * * * NS
2 There is no significant relationship
between alcohol consumption and their
living conditions
Chi - Square NS NS NS NS
3 There is no significant difference
between their age and alcohol drinking
motives
Chi - Square NS * NS NS
4 There is no significant relationship
between family status and alcohol
drinking motives and misuse of
alcohol.
Chi - Square NS
* * NS
5 There is no significant relationship
with the type of course and alcohol
drinking motives and misuse of
alcohol.
Chi - Square NS
* * NS
6 There is a significant association
between psychosocial education in
alcohol related problems and change in
the attitude towards drinking among
students.
Chi - Square * *
7 There is a significant association
between psychosocial education in
alcohol related problem and its effects
in reducing alcohol misuse among
college students
Chi - Square * *
*Significant, NS- Not significant
The Mainhypothesis is that psychosocial education in alcohol related problems can make significant
difference in drinking habits among college students. The results clearly show that there is a
significant reduction in their drinking habits after psychosocial education.
From the previous chapters explained about parents influence on their children at the stage of college
level reduces and the children behave that they are grown up. Here they are more influenced by their
peers. The researcher firmly believes this is one of the main reasons why they misuse alcohol.
Keeping in mind this reason the researcher constructed the hypotheses that there may not be much
influence on living with family or not, type of family, course, year etc
4.16Conclusion
The researcher feels that since the study focused only on alcohol promoted honest responding from
students. The students had many queries about alcohol misuse during their psychosocial education
period. When myths were bursted and real facts were revealed about how alcohol use turns into
addiction, they promised never to be alcoholics. The students also said that the two questionnaires
(Drinking motives questionnaire revised (DMQR) and Alcohol use disorder identification test
(AUDIT) helped them to identify their motives and was used for understanding their attitudes towards
drinking. They would able to correct themselves from alcohol misuse. We observe from the results
that the psychosocial education has shown efficacy in reducing risky drinking (risk drinking leads to
severe heath problems even death) among college students.
The findings and the suggestions are presented in the following Chapter -V.
REFERENCES
1. Pradeep et al (2010). Severity of alcoholism in Indian males: Correlation with age of onset
and family history of alcoholism. Indian J Psychiatry; 52:243-99.
2. Hingson et al. (2005) Magnitude of alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among U.S.
college students ages 18-24: Changes from 1998 to 2001.Annual Review of Public Health.
26:259-279.
3. Kraus L et al, (2005)"Inconsistencies Between Actual and Estimated BAC Levels in a Field
Study of College Students: Do Students Really Know How Much They Drink? Alcoholism:
Clinical & Experimental Research, Vol 29, No 9, 1672–1676
4. Grant Valerie et al (2007), psychometric evaluation of the five-factor Modified Drinking
Motives Questionnaire--Revised in undergraduates, Addictive behaviors. 32(11):2611-32.
5. Sharma Rahul , Grover L Vijay , ChaturvediSanjay (April2010)Tobacco use among
adolescent students and the influence of role models, Indian Journal of Community medicine,
Vol. 35 (2), 272-275,http://www.ijcm.org.in/article
6. Kuntsche, Stewart, Cooper (2008) How stable is the motive-alcohol use link? A
Cross- National Validation of the Drinking Motives Questionnaire Revised among
Adolescents from Switzerland, Canada, and the United States, Journal Studies
Alcohol Drugs, 69(3):388-96, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
7. Carey K B, C J Correia. (1997) Drinking motives predict alcohol-related problems in college
students, Journal of studies on alcohol. 58(1):100-5.
8. Kokotailo et al (2004), Validity of the alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test in College
Students, Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, Vol. 28, No, 6, 914-920.
9. Brown, S.A., Tapert, S.F., Granholm, E., and Delis, D.C. 2000. Neurocognitive functioning of
adolescents: Effects of protracted alcohol use. Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental
Research, 24: 164–171.
10. Neighbors et al. (2004), Feeling Controlled and Drinking Motives Among College
Students: Contingent Self-Esteem as a Mediator, Self and Identity, 3: 207–224,
Copyright # 2004 Psychology Press, ISSN: 1529-8868 print/1529-8876 online
DOI: 10.1080/13576500444000029
11. S.H. Stewart, Chambers Laura (2000), Drinking motives and restraint, Addictive Behaviors,
Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 269–274
12. Martens P. Matthew, Ferrier G. Amanda, Cimini Dolores M (2007), Psychology of
Addictive behaviors, journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive
Behaviors. 01/09/2007; 21(3):307-15, ISSN: 0893-164X, DOI: 10.1037/0893-
164X.21.3.307
13. Longabaugh Richard and Morgenstern Jon (1999), Cognitive-Behavioral Coping-Skills
Therapy for Alcohol Dependence, Alcohol Research & Health, Vol. 23, No. 2, Pages 78-85
14. Cooper, M.L., Frone, M.R., Russell, M., &Mudar, P. (1995). Drinking to regular positive and
negative emotions: A motivational model of alcohol use. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 69, 990–1005.
15. Cooper, M.L. (1994) Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: Development and
validation of a four-factor model. Psychological Assessment, 6, 117-128.
16. Mezquita et al.(2011) Drinking Motives in Clinical and General Populations,
European Addiction Research, 17:250–261, DOI: 10.1159/000328510
17. Nemeth Zsofia(2011), The role of motivational components of alcohol use
among youth indifferent settings and cultures, Doctoral thesis Booklet.
http://pszichologia.phd.elte.hu/vedesek/thesis_EN_final.pdf
18. Perkins Wesley H. (2002) Social Norms and the Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Collegiate
Contexts, Journal of Studies on Alcohol, Supplement No. 14: 164- 172.
19. Carey, K. B. (1995). Alcohol-related expectancies predict quantity and frequency of heavy
drinking among college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 9(4), 236–241.
20. Stewart S H et al, (1996), Examination of a three-dimensional drinking motives questionnaire
in a young adult university student sample, Behaviour research and therapy. 34(1):61-71.
21. Read et al. (2003), Examining the Role of Drinking Motives in College Student Alcohol Use
and Problems, Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, Vol. 17, No. 1, 13–23
22. Kuntsche, E., Knibbe, R., Gmel, G., &Engels., R. (2005). Why do young people drink? A
review of drinking motives. Clinical Psychology Review, 25, 841-861.
23. BaborF. Thomas and Higgins-Biddle C. John (2001) Brief intervention for Hazardous and
Harmful Drinking, Department of Mental Health and Substance Dependence,
WHO/MSD/MSB/01.6b World Health Organization
24. Wechsler, H.; Lee, J.E.; Kuo, M.; et al. (2002), Trends in college binge drinking during a
period of increased prevention efforts: Findings from four Harvard School of Public Health
study surveys, 1993–2001. Journal of American College Health 50(5):203–217.
25. Larimer et al (2002) Identification, Prevention and Treatment: A Review of Individual-
Focused Strategies to Reduce Problematic Alcohol Consumption by College Students. J.
Stud. Alcohol, Supplement No. 14: 148-163
26. Nancy P Barnett, James G Murphy, Suzanne M Colby, Peter M Monti. (2007) Efficacy of
counselor vs. computer-delivered intervention with mandated college students, Addictive
behaviors. 32(11):25-29
27. Monti M Peter Tevyaw , Tracy O’Leary., and Borsari Brian, (2004/2005), Drinking Among
Young Adults, Screening, Brief Intervention, and Outcome, Alcohol Research & Health Vol.
28, No. 4, -236-244.
28. Peter Finn (1997) preventing Alcohol Related Problems on Campus- Substance Free
Residence Halls, Abt. Associates Inc. A publication of the Higher Education Center for
Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse and Violence Prevention, Education Development Center,
Inc.55 Chapel Street, Newton, MA 02458-1060
29. Ralph et al (2009) Magnitude of and Trends in Alcohol-Related Mortality and Morbidity
among U.S. College Students Ages 18-24, 1998-2005, J Stud Alcohol Drugs Suppl. 2009
July; (Supplement no. 16): 12–20.
30. McBride Nyanda et al., (2004) Harm minimization in school drug education: final results of
the School Health and Alcohol Harm Reduction Project (SHAHRP), Society for the Study of
Addiction, Addiction, 99, 278–291
31. Borsari, Brian et al (2005), Two brief alcohol interventions for mandated college students,
Psychology of addictive behaviors: journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive
Behaviors. 19(3):296-302.
32. Gilder et al (2008), Factors Associated With Remission from Alcohol Dependence in an
American Indian Community Group, Am J Psychiatry ; 165:1172–1178,
ajp.psychiatryonline.org.
33. Grant Valerie et al (2009). Coping-anxiety and coping-depression motives predict different
daily mood-drinking relationships, Psychology of addictive behaviors: journal of the Society
of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors. 23(2):226-37
34. Masayo Geshi et al, (2007) Effects of alcohol-related health education on alcohol and
drinking behavior awareness among Japanese junior college students:A Randomized
controlled trial, Department of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, Okayama University
Graduate School of Medicine, Acta Med. Okayama,. Vol. 61, No.6, pp.345-354
35. McCarty Dennis, Edmundson Eldon, Hartnett Tim (2006), Charting a Path Between
Research and Practice in Alcoholism Treatment Alcohol Research & Health, Vol. 29, No. 1,
36. Murphy et al, (2006), Alcohol-related and alcohol-free activity participation and enjoyment
among college students: behavioral theories of choice analysis, Experimental and clinical
psychopharmacology; 14(3):339-49
37. Thadani, Vandana; Huchting, Karen; LaBrie, Joseph (Aug 2009),Alcohol-Related
Information in Multi-Component Interventions and College Students' Drinking Behavior
(EJ871307) Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, v53 n2 p31-51
38. Weinrieb, R.M., and O’Brien, C.P. (1997), Naltrexone in the treatment of alcoholism. Annual
Review of Medicine, 48: 477–487.
39. Lovecchio p. Catherine, Wyatt M Todd and DeJongWilliam (2010) Reductions in Drinking
and Alcohol-Related Harms Reported by First-Year College Students Taking an Online
Alcohol Education Course: A Randomized Trial, Journal of Health Communication,
15(7):805-19.
40. Plant Moira (1992) Risk-takers “Alcohol, drugs, sex and youth”, Routledge, London.
41. Cooper, M.L., Russell, M., Skinner, J.B., &Windle, M. (1992). Development and validation
of a three-dimensional measure of drinking motives. Psychological Assessment, 4, 123- 132.
42. Geller, E.S., and Kalsher, M.J. (1990), Environmental determinants of party drinking:
Bartenders versus self-service. Environment and Behavior, 22: 74–90.
43. Schroeder M. Christine and Prentice A. Deborah (1998), Exposing pluralistic ignorance to
reduce acohol use among college students, Journal of applied social psychology, 28, 23, pp
2150-2180.
44. O’Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2002). Epidemiology of alcohol and other drug use
among American college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, S14, 23–39.
45. Clements, R. (1998). A critical evaluation of several alcohol screening instruments using the
CIDI-SAM as a criterion measure. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 22, 985–
993.
46. Carey, K. B. (1995). Alcohol-related expectancies predict quantity and frequency of heavy
drinking among college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 9(4), 236–241.
47. Wechsler et al (2000), College Binge Drinking in the 1990s: A Continuing Problem. Journal
of American College Health; v.48, 5, 199-208
top related